←back to thread

Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

(playhearthstone.com)
2525 points hownottowrite | 1 comments | 08 Oct 19 09:23 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
bayesian_horse ◴[08 Oct 19 12:05 UTC] No.21191285[source]▶
It's really hard to tell the difference between what is genuinely offensive and what is not.

No easy answers. In this case, maybe there is a relatively simple rule: Supporting democracy must not in itself be regarded as offensive...

replies(8): >>21191379 #>>21191486 #>>21191575 #>>21191815 #>>21191939 #>>21192121 #>>21193685 #>>21194741 #
ekianjo ◴[08 Oct 19 13:06 UTC] No.21191815[source]▶
> It's really hard to tell the difference between what is genuinely offensive and what is not.

You can't have both "Free Speech" and "You Can't Say Anything Offensive" at the same time, because there is too much overlap. So you have to choose. The US constitution is pretty clear that "Free Speech" is the higher principle.

replies(2): >>21191847 #>>21191901 #
umvi ◴[08 Oct 19 13:10 UTC] No.21191847[source]▶
"Free Speech only protects you from the government, not private companies who don't want to tolerate your hate on their platform"

I don't agree with this stance, but it is an oft-heard one defending companies who stifle speech (as long as the stifled speech was a far right Nazi website or anti-LGBT comments).

As we see, that stance is dangerous and extends to companies stifling politically inconvenient speech like "I support Hong Kong protesters".

replies(4): >>21192377 #>>21192944 #>>21193291 #>>21201347 #
1. icebraining ◴[08 Oct 19 14:00 UTC] No.21192377[source]▶
It's a silly stance, even if one thinks private companies should be allowed censor who they want on their platform. It conflates "free speech" (which is a wide philosophical concept) with the "first amendment to the US constitution", which is just a particular law regulating the government of a specific country.