←back to thread

2525 points hownottowrite | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.409s | source
Show context
johnchristopher ◴[] No.21191363[source]
From 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."

replies(2): >>21193676 #>>21193697 #
ummonk ◴[] No.21193676[source]
Okay 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.
replies(2): >>21194017 #>>21194291 #
hannasanarion ◴[] No.21194291[source]
Why does the fact that the person making a political statement knew that they were making a political statement make their banning okay?
replies(1): >>21194607 #
3minus1 ◴[] No.21194607[source]
There'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.
replies(4): >>21194816 #>>21194877 #>>21195757 #>>21196475 #
1. jammygit ◴[] No.21195757[source]
You 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?