4 ms·

Same here. I'm prepared to be sorely disappointed though. They're going to clamp down hard on people (although, this might even lead to a bigger storm).

diggan 7y ago
> They're going to clamp down hard on people How hard can they clamp down really? Have a peaceful protest outside the venue in public and there is nothing they can do. (I'm assuming you have freedom of assembly and right to protest in the US)
- save_ferris 7y ago
  Given their history of banning pro players for their speech, seeing more of these bans for high-profile members of the community who participate doesn't seem farfetched.
  - diggan 7y ago
    Guess we understand "clamp down hard on people" differently where not being able to participate in a tournament (private) seems very light, compared to what others can end up with when speaking out about something (see https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/spain-counter-terror-law-used-to-crush-satire-and-creative-expression-online/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/spain-counter... for example)
    - jplayer01 7y ago
      You know, I vaguely remember HK protestors being glad that people were making the effort to make Blizzard accountable for punishing people for speaking out in support of HK. Is it suddenly a bad thing because the people trying to protest at a Blizzard event aren't being beaten?
      - diggan 7y ago
        No, absolutely not! I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I love that people are standing up for what they believe in. I just disagreed with the notion that whatever Blizzard will do, can be classified as "clamping down hard", but it might just be that I have a different experience of what that means. And I might be wrong, maybe Blizzard will do drastic, irrational actions like involve riot police or something. Who knows.
        jplayer01 7y ago
        It's important to see an idiom like that contextually. Of course there's going to be a difference if you're in Spain on the streets facing off the police or if you're going to a gaming event hosted by a games developer. Clamping down will take on different meanings depending on who is involved or where it's taking place, but I don't think it's wrong to use 'clamping down' in this context.
- jplayer01 7y ago
  Kicking people out of Blizzcon itself? Denying entry? Profiling players? I don't know. I'll let them surprise me.
  - diggan 7y ago
    Yeah, I guess in the context of a attendee that's "clamping down hard", I guess I'm just used to "clamping down hard" meaning something more than being excluded from a private event.
    - jplayer01 7y ago
      I mean, these are people that have spent thousands of dollars to be at the event. Diehard fans who love Blizzard. I'd say it is clamping down hard if they start kicking people out. I don't think it's a great look when your most ardent fans are staging protests inside your otherwise most celebrated yearly event, or what you might do to prevent it. Nobody here is talking about Blizzard arresting them or shooting at them.
  - n0rbwah 7y ago
    What could possibly go wrong?
lawrenceyan 7y ago
They can't kick out people for dressing up as Winnie the Pooh though. That's just someone going to BlizzCon in their favorite cosplay outfit.
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  Sure they can. Not without PR issues, but their rules will certainly be written with enough wiggle room to tell people to buzz off.
  - lawrenceyan 7y ago
    It would be a mistake to do that. The headlines would write themselves at that point: "Blizzard bans Winnie the Pooh outfits from BlizzCon". We're talking 'The Onion' level kinds of headlines here. That's the real problem they're facing with this situation. They pretty much lose right now regardless of what choice they make. I do feel a little bit bad frankly, but at the same time, I'm also quite excited for some schadenfreude.
    - Mirioron 7y ago
      If it's a lose-lose situation for Blizzard then they could very well pick China over the West. Them making that choice will give them a bad reputation in the West, but it might provide them opportunities in China.
      - gpm 7y ago
        Pick < 10% of their market, <10% of the investors, and the ire of the government they are incorporated under? This seems highly unlikely... They might try to straddle the US and China, on the basis that the US has no real teeth, but they aren't going to abandon it.
        Mirioron 7y ago
        >They might try to straddle the US and China, on the basis that the US has no real teeth That's the point. The US can't really shut out Blizzard even if they engage in this kind of behavior, because the US gives them freedom to make their own decisions. I'm saying that if it's a lose-lose sustain then Blizzard might pick appeasing the Chinese market, because there's a limit to what can happen to them in the US. The players might get mad, but plenty of gaming companies exist that lots of players are angry about (eg EA, Ubisoft).
AlexandrB 7y ago
> They're going to clamp down hard on people IMHO that would be a serious tactical error and prove Blizzard's critics right (i.e. this is about China, Blizzard cares more about revenue from the Chinese market than about freedom of expression). If there's zero crackdown, the people in pro Hong Kong stuff will look a little goofy in retrospect. Like they were just overreacting to the initial ban like gamers are wont to do sometimes.
- jplayer01 7y ago
  > If there's zero crackdown, the people in pro Hong Kong stuff will look a little goofy in retrospect. If there's zero crackdown, then the protestors have won and they have a platform to show their support in a public setting for HK. I don't see the downside here. Isn't that what people want? To be able to protest the Chinese government and their actions in HK freely and without punishment?
  - AlexandrB 7y ago
    > I don't see the downside here. Isn't that what people want? To be able to protest the Chinese government and their actions in HK freely and without punishment? I don't think most gamers actually care about Hong Kong specifically. If they did there are more effective venues for protest than Blizzcon. My sense is that what really got people upset is the suppression of - seemingly virtuous - speech, and the perception of Chinese influence on Blizzard's policies. For example, showing up to Blizzcon in a Winnie the Pooh outfit is effectively an attempt at trolling Blizzard and doesn't do much to inform or sway anyone on Hong Kong. If Blizzard responds, the troll has been proven right (Winnie the Pooh is offensive only in the very narrow context of CCP leadership). If Blizzard does nothing, it's just a guy cosplaying Winnie the Pooh and the attempt fizzles out. Edit: To reframe this a little bit, I think protestors are going into Blizzcon with a hypothesis: Blizzard is suppressing a certain kind of free speech because of its financial ties to China. So far, Blizzard's official position has been that this is not about China at all. While I'm sure many would like to help Hong Kong, what they really want out of Blizzcon specifically is for their hypothesis to be validated. For them to be proven right (I include myself in this group, by the way). If Blizzard basically ignores the protestors, it lends credence to the official line that banning Blitzchung was a purely impartial, administrative action and the hypothesis remains unproven.

diggan 7y ago

> They're going to clamp down hard on people How hard can they clamp down really? Have a peaceful protest outside the venue in public and there is nothing they can do. (I'm assuming you have freedom of assembly and right to protest in the US)

save_ferris 7y ago
Given their history of banning pro players for their speech, seeing more of these bans for high-profile members of the community who participate doesn't seem farfetched.
- diggan 7y ago
  Guess we understand "clamp down hard on people" differently where not being able to participate in a tournament (private) seems very light, compared to what others can end up with when speaking out about something (see https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/spain-counter-terror-law-used-to-crush-satire-and-creative-expression-online/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/spain-counter... for example)
  - jplayer01 7y ago
    You know, I vaguely remember HK protestors being glad that people were making the effort to make Blizzard accountable for punishing people for speaking out in support of HK. Is it suddenly a bad thing because the people trying to protest at a Blizzard event aren't being beaten?
    - diggan 7y ago
      No, absolutely not! I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I love that people are standing up for what they believe in. I just disagreed with the notion that whatever Blizzard will do, can be classified as "clamping down hard", but it might just be that I have a different experience of what that means. And I might be wrong, maybe Blizzard will do drastic, irrational actions like involve riot police or something. Who knows.
      - jplayer01 7y ago
        It's important to see an idiom like that contextually. Of course there's going to be a difference if you're in Spain on the streets facing off the police or if you're going to a gaming event hosted by a games developer. Clamping down will take on different meanings depending on who is involved or where it's taking place, but I don't think it's wrong to use 'clamping down' in this context.
jplayer01 7y ago
Kicking people out of Blizzcon itself? Denying entry? Profiling players? I don't know. I'll let them surprise me.
- diggan 7y ago
  Yeah, I guess in the context of a attendee that's "clamping down hard", I guess I'm just used to "clamping down hard" meaning something more than being excluded from a private event.
  - jplayer01 7y ago
    I mean, these are people that have spent thousands of dollars to be at the event. Diehard fans who love Blizzard. I'd say it is clamping down hard if they start kicking people out. I don't think it's a great look when your most ardent fans are staging protests inside your otherwise most celebrated yearly event, or what you might do to prevent it. Nobody here is talking about Blizzard arresting them or shooting at them.
- n0rbwah 7y ago
  What could possibly go wrong?

lawrenceyan 7y ago

They can't kick out people for dressing up as Winnie the Pooh though. That's just someone going to BlizzCon in their favorite cosplay outfit.

ceejayoz 7y ago
Sure they can. Not without PR issues, but their rules will certainly be written with enough wiggle room to tell people to buzz off.
- lawrenceyan 7y ago
  It would be a mistake to do that. The headlines would write themselves at that point: "Blizzard bans Winnie the Pooh outfits from BlizzCon". We're talking 'The Onion' level kinds of headlines here. That's the real problem they're facing with this situation. They pretty much lose right now regardless of what choice they make. I do feel a little bit bad frankly, but at the same time, I'm also quite excited for some schadenfreude.
  - Mirioron 7y ago
    If it's a lose-lose situation for Blizzard then they could very well pick China over the West. Them making that choice will give them a bad reputation in the West, but it might provide them opportunities in China.
    - gpm 7y ago
      Pick < 10% of their market, <10% of the investors, and the ire of the government they are incorporated under? This seems highly unlikely... They might try to straddle the US and China, on the basis that the US has no real teeth, but they aren't going to abandon it.
      - Mirioron 7y ago
        >They might try to straddle the US and China, on the basis that the US has no real teeth That's the point. The US can't really shut out Blizzard even if they engage in this kind of behavior, because the US gives them freedom to make their own decisions. I'm saying that if it's a lose-lose sustain then Blizzard might pick appeasing the Chinese market, because there's a limit to what can happen to them in the US. The players might get mad, but plenty of gaming companies exist that lots of players are angry about (eg EA, Ubisoft).

AlexandrB 7y ago

> They're going to clamp down hard on people IMHO that would be a serious tactical error and prove Blizzard's critics right (i.e. this is about China, Blizzard cares more about revenue from the Chinese market than about freedom of expression). If there's zero crackdown, the people in pro Hong Kong stuff will look a little goofy in retrospect. Like they were just overreacting to the initial ban like gamers are wont to do sometimes.

jplayer01 7y ago
> If there's zero crackdown, the people in pro Hong Kong stuff will look a little goofy in retrospect. If there's zero crackdown, then the protestors have won and they have a platform to show their support in a public setting for HK. I don't see the downside here. Isn't that what people want? To be able to protest the Chinese government and their actions in HK freely and without punishment?
- AlexandrB 7y ago
  > I don't see the downside here. Isn't that what people want? To be able to protest the Chinese government and their actions in HK freely and without punishment? I don't think most gamers actually care about Hong Kong specifically. If they did there are more effective venues for protest than Blizzcon. My sense is that what really got people upset is the suppression of - seemingly virtuous - speech, and the perception of Chinese influence on Blizzard's policies. For example, showing up to Blizzcon in a Winnie the Pooh outfit is effectively an attempt at trolling Blizzard and doesn't do much to inform or sway anyone on Hong Kong. If Blizzard responds, the troll has been proven right (Winnie the Pooh is offensive only in the very narrow context of CCP leadership). If Blizzard does nothing, it's just a guy cosplaying Winnie the Pooh and the attempt fizzles out. Edit: To reframe this a little bit, I think protestors are going into Blizzcon with a hypothesis: Blizzard is suppressing a certain kind of free speech because of its financial ties to China. So far, Blizzard's official position has been that this is not about China at all. While I'm sure many would like to help Hong Kong, what they really want out of Blizzcon specifically is for their hypothesis to be validated. For them to be proven right (I include myself in this group, by the way). If Blizzard basically ignores the protestors, it lends credence to the official line that banning Blitzchung was a purely impartial, administrative action and the hypothesis remains unproven.