The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 15, 2018, 05:13:06 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul Reiche and Fred Ford want to continue the story they started when they created Star Control II — The Ur-Quan Masters. «Happy days and jubilation!» «But wait!» «There is something wrong here... something which makes my sheath retract and my talons ooze.» «Please, Captain, we need your help!»

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  General UQM Discussion (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  My take on Stardock
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 66 67 [68] Print
Author Topic: My take on Stardock  (Read 33328 times)
Elestan
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 389



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1005 on: July 18, 2018, 07:20:12 am »

In court matters, amended complaints were published yesterday, and I've just finished reviewing them.  Since this thread has gotten absurdly long and somewhat sidetracked, I decided to start discussion of them in a fresh thread.

Please leave any talk of review bombs or SJWs behind.  Thank you.
Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 3779


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1006 on: July 18, 2018, 03:49:47 pm »

Simply asking people for their feedback is not "minimally" acceptable, it's across the board accepted by everyone. Have you ever heard of Rotten Tomatoes or IGN? Seems like plenty of people are fine using those sites.

Asking for input with the stated goal of damaging someone? You literally said you were trying to get more negative reviews. I quoted it right to your face and yet you insist that I'm misunderstanding. I can read.

I don't logically *know* they're going to be negative because it would be a statistical gamble, which, based on the fans, would have a good chance of succeeding.

And that is enough, as you should know if you actually read what I posted and then reposted for your benefit, though this part wasn't put in italics.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 03:58:34 pm by Death 999 » Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1007 on: July 18, 2018, 08:10:18 pm »

Simply asking people for their feedback is not "minimally" acceptable, it's across the board accepted by everyone. Have you ever heard of Rotten Tomatoes or IGN? Seems like plenty of people are fine using those sites.
Asking for input with the stated goal of damaging someone? You literally said you were trying to get more negative reviews. I quoted it right to your face and yet you insist that I'm misunderstanding. I can read.

Again, you don't seem to understand that it's okay, people have the right to both ask for and express these ideas. The *intent* isn't to damage, the *intent* is to get feedback with the *hope* that Paul and Fred get funding. A Hollywood producer won't win a suit against either me nor Rotten Tomatoes when I use the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes to judge a movie I decide not to see. Maybe you live in a country with limited freedom so you don't deem such a tactic acceptable, but Stardock is a U.S. company.


And that is enough, as you should know if you actually read what I posted and then reposted for your benefit, though this part wasn't put in italics.

But that's the irony I pointed out which is now more ironic because you didn't understand that. You did undersell your sympathy as if to say there was still an ethical qualm you had with it, which I don't see any reason for unless your upbringing was in a country with more limited freedom.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2018, 01:01:07 am by CommanderShepard » Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 866



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1008 on: July 18, 2018, 11:20:14 pm »

No I'm not here trolling.  I'm calling those who are being Social Justice Warriors and the cult they indoctrinate the trolls.

Doesn't sound so bad to fight for social justice. Especially not if you live in a country where women or homosexuals are discriminated against by law, or even if you live in a country where men are discriminated against by law...
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 11:27:32 pm by Zanthius » Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1009 on: July 19, 2018, 12:39:54 am »

No I'm not here trolling.  I'm calling those who are being Social Justice Warriors and the cult they indoctrinate the trolls.

Doesn't sound so bad to fight for social justice. Especially not if you live in a country where women or homosexuals are discriminated against by law, or even if you live in a country where men are discriminated against by law...

Some people take it out of hand as an excuse to troll which I think is what the fear was.
Logged
rosepatel
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 137



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1010 on: July 19, 2018, 03:29:47 am »

SJW is one of those meaningless insults that reveals you more about the person hurling it than the person it's being hurled against.
Logged
CelticMinstrel
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 502



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1011 on: July 19, 2018, 04:50:32 am »

SomeMost people take it out of hand as an excuse to troll which I think is what the fear was.
FYT

SJW is one of those meaningless insults that reveals you more about the person hurling it than the person it's being hurled against.
This.
Logged
Kaiser
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1012 on: July 20, 2018, 11:43:10 am »

It is always cute when people cry "freedom of speech" on the internet.  This is all private property here.  You have as much freedom as the owners or their proxies (such as Death, a Moderator) allow you to have.
Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1013 on: July 20, 2018, 11:44:51 am »

It is always cute when people cry "freedom of speech" on the internet.  This is all private property here.  You have as much freedom as the owners or their proxies (such as Death, a Moderator) allow you to have.
That's not really the dispute. A moderator can delete whatever they like, but no one will win a suit against anyone here for anything they said. Freedom of speech isn't protection from private property, it's protection from prosecution.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2018, 11:48:04 am by CommanderShepard » Logged
Kaiser
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1014 on: July 21, 2018, 11:20:36 am »

Not really. Because even then there are restrictions.  You can't yell fire in a theater.  You can't provoke others to commit a crime. 

You have freedom to say something, but it's not freedom from consequences, legal or otherwise.
Logged
CommanderShepard
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1015 on: July 21, 2018, 11:35:17 am »

Not really. Because even then there are restrictions.  You can't yell fire in a theater.  You can't provoke others to commit a crime.  

There are obviously reasonable limits, as with any law. But, you have the right to criticize a person or legal entity without fear of prosecution. There are cases of libel, but that's very tricky to sort out and includes proving an intentionally untruthful statement that can also be proven to cause quantifiable damage to another party and it specifically excludes statements that are intentionally hyperbolic or unrealistic.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2018, 11:40:13 am by CommanderShepard » Logged
kaminiwa
Zebranky food
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 23



View Profile
Re: My take on Stardock
« Reply #1016 on: July 23, 2018, 08:40:03 pm »

Not really. Because even then there are restrictions.  You can't yell fire in a theater.  You can't provoke others to commit a crime. 

You have freedom to say something, but it's not freedom from consequences, legal or otherwise.

The whole point of the First Amendment is to protect people from any legal / government-inflicted consequences of their speech.

The more philosophical concept of "Free Speech" is that if you make consequences for speech too harsh, you get a censorious society ala the novel 1984.

It is absolutely about freedom from consequences, just not all of them - people are welcome to dislike you, disagree with you, and even debate you. But a mod banning you is absolutely an abridgment of Free Speech, and a government agency doing it is a violation of the First Amendment.

Of course, the mods are welcome to care or not care about Free Speech to the degree they choose, and I think that Death's stance is a healthy one.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 66 67 [68] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!