SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
If you have ever wanted to see an indie video game developer commit PR suicide, then 2016 is your lucky year. In what appears to be an attempt to outdo Hello Games and their No Man's Sky debacle, indie developer Digital Homicide has filed a personal injury lawsuit against 100 people on Steam for writing negative reviews and comments about their various games. As the 100 people listed in the lawsuit are identified only by their Steam usernames, Digital Homicide has also subpoenaed Valve, the company behind Steam, for the actual names of the 100 people that they are suing.
As if that wasn't enough, Digital Homicide is allegedly considering another lawsuit directly against Valve in an attempt to create a digital "safe space" for developers on Steam. This effectively means that on top of the $18 million that Digital Homicide is seeking in damages in their original lawsuit against the 100 Jane and John Does, Digital Homicide wants Valve to create an environment on Steam where developers are safe from things like "harassment, verbal and written assault, libel, and slander." Mr. Bob Lawsuitsfeedmyfamily, a retired legal advisor that specializes in the study of frivolous lawsuits, stated that the two cases will likely "force Digital Homicide to change their company's name to Digital Suicide." Even in a best case scenario where Digital Homicide somehow wins their lawsuits against Valve, "they will likely be ridiculed and hated for as long as the Internet can remember" Lawsuitsfeedmyfamily said.
Source: http://techraptor.net/content/kekraptor-digital-homicide-sues-valve-wants-steam-safe-space
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 18 2016, @10:19PM
Commonly today 'safe space' is taken to mean a space where nobody can offend anyone else. Trigger warnings abound, everyone tiptoes because what is not offensive to me - or the vast majority of the public - may be perceived as offensive to someone who had a bad experience with pumpkins on Halloween as a child.
Commonly ... in the circles of the alt-right and their fellow travellers. Not so much by the people who actually use the term without derision.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by KiloByte on Sunday September 18 2016, @10:51PM
Is it even possible to use the term "safe space" without derision? At least speaking from Poland, I can't see how -- is the US reality that different? Or is this an extreme case of Poe's law?
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 18 2016, @11:56PM
is the US reality that different?
Speaking as an American ... you have no idea how different our realit can be at times. Even we're shocked by it on occasion.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @12:11AM
I loathe the term "safe space" as it conjures up in my mind coddled little babies who can't handle the real world on it's own terms. And in practice, more often than not, such "safe spaces" are merely used to shut down people from expressing opinions that others find "uncomfortable" or otherwise objectionable; this is clearly an abuse of free speech rights. On the other hand, I can see the usefulness of telling shit-stirring trolls to shut up and take a hike so that a real adult conversation can progress. Trolls, in all their various manifestations, have no desire to have honest conversations about sensitive subjects, or indeed anything. Their only agenda is to derail conversations and create controversy, just for the lulz. Think about it this way. Suppose you need to call a meeting at work because you have a tight deadline to get shit done. Now, suppose there is one member of the team who will invariably derail such meetings to harp on his incessant disgust with the Linux OS. Be honest. That guy will pointedly not be invited to the meeting. You know I'm right about this. As another example, how many times have we seen people here on SN or that other site immediately take over the discussion of a news story to turn it into their own personal soapbox? How many times have you thought to yourself "I just wish he would shut up and go away so that we could have a serious discussion"? In that light, I could see some value in creating temporary safe spaces--and I must emphasize the stress on the temporary part of that--so that discussion is not immediately derailed by a shit-stirring fool whose only objective is to create strife and controversy. Again, the emphasis should be on temporary so that an adult conversation can take place. Of course, all the rest of the time everyone, including the trolls, should have complete, unfettered freedom to say whatever and wherever they want. Just sayin'.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Monday September 19 2016, @01:53AM
...how many times have we seen people here on SN or that other site immediately take over the discussion of a news story to turn it into their own personal soapbox? How many times have you thought to yourself "I just wish he would shut up and go away so that we could have a serious discussion"?...
Sounds like a reason for an ignore* file (as at linuxquestions.org)?
*AKA "killfile" in less politically correct days (is that irony?).
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 2) by Marand on Monday September 19 2016, @04:26AM
Sounds like a reason for an ignore* file (as at linuxquestions.org)?
*AKA "killfile" in less politically correct days (is that irony?).
In that particular case, I think the change in nomenclature is an improvement just because it's clearer what it does. Though I'm not sure why either one was ever considered preferable to "blacklist" which is a well-understood term that has existed for a very long time (centuries). And yes, I'm aware that some people consider "blacklist" offensive because they apparently don't understand that "black" has meanings outside of ethnicity. They're buffoons.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Bogsnoticus on Monday September 19 2016, @07:06AM
They're only offended by the term blacklist because they're too niggardly to buy a thesaurus.
Damn, now I've done it. At least I didn't say Jeho....what are you doing with those rocks?
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @01:30PM
Well, even in the past days, score files were superior to kill files, as you could be more flexible (for example, hide a post only if it meets several of a list of criteria, making their score add up to beyond the threshold, or in the opposite direction highlight posts that met several positive criteria).
(Score: 2) by t-3 on Monday September 19 2016, @01:27AM
AFAICT "safe spaces" are something that only theoretically exist? I've never encoutered anything in real life remotely resembling one, except maybe for in grade school where you could get in trouble for saying certain things. I think most americans would ridicule the idea, because although most people believe in civilized discourse, this is something that is done by choice by rational people, not codified and required to the point of infantilizing communities and making any discussion an exercise in absurdity.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @02:11AM
Yet only in America is it an actual thing.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @02:28AM
"Safe spaces" exist everywhere, you just don't know them by that name.
For example, the westboro baptist church makes a habit of trying to violate a couple of specific types of safe spaces. Major league football games are safe spaces for so-called patriots - just look at how much shit Kapernick is getting for violating that safe space. The airport is a safe space where you can't talk about bombs. Go to a southern baptist church and try talking about all the evil done by southern baptists and see how quickly you are ejected. Go to Brigham Young University and try drinking alcohol or kissing your gay partner. Go to a hillel house frat and start talking about how hitler was a great guy,
So now some people want to establish areas with similar rules for whatever topics they care about and all the self-righteous freedom warriors get their panties in a twist. Jesus fucking christ... a bunch of people who are blind and when someone actually shines a light they lose their shit because for the first time they start to see a tiny piece of the world and they do not like!!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @03:09AM
Try going to a oil company shareholder's meeting and talking about climate change...
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @05:33AM
The problem is that the people who explicitly demand safe spaces usually end up taking over locations where normally anyone can go, try to limit discussions in normal places, etc. If they really were just minding their own business and creating some exclusive group somewhere, I doubt anyone would care.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @10:17AM
Thats a fantasy. Seriously. Its just wishful thinking by people who want to rationalize being a dick. Not unlike the anti-gay hysteria about how gays don't just want equal rights, they have a homosexual agenda to recruit young straight boys.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @06:00AM
As the nature of PC culture has morphed from "pleased don't be inadvertently a dick" to 50,000 gendered pronouns shitlord, so too has the nature of safe spaces.
Letting people morn in peace? Very much in the don't be a dick spectrum. Kapernick's protest? Less meaningful than John Carlos's (and in many respects defining patriotism). Airports? I think most people are beyond the security theater at this point when the space is so safe all liquids must be in the mandatory quart zip-top bag.
Private churches and universities? Their space, their rules.
To conflate these things as all being the same is just to lose all sense of granularity.
Especially for an open forum like a product review of a message board; you are being disingenuous in the extreme.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @11:32AM
> Less meaningful than John Carlos's (and in many respects defining patriotism).
So fucking what? Your opinion about the "meaningfulness" of his protest is totally fucking irrelevant to the topic. Its about it being perceived as a violation of a safe space, doesn't have to be well thought out.
But since you brought it up, John Carlos thinks you are an asshole and Kapernick has his strong support. [mercurynews.com] Dicklicks like you were saying the exact same crap about Carlos at the time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @02:17PM
50,000 gendered pronouns
You've been successfully trolled. Please keep reminding me why I decided to vote Clinton.
(Score: 2) by t-3 on Monday September 19 2016, @01:05PM
By that definition, all of civilization is a "safe space." Go to any public place and express an opinion that's unpopular - you'll be attacked verbally if not physically and maybe even harassed by law enforcement.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @01:37PM
Gotta love the absurdity of it though, essentially saying someone with a bullhorn proselytizing at 3:00 AM from the street is the same as not wanting to hear a controversial opinion. See? You're just the same. You just want "your" safe space.
And if someone breaks into your home and you don't welcome them with open arms, you're just a censoring hypocrite not wanting to hear some one else through.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 19 2016, @02:32PM
There's already laws on the books to punish those things, that have nothing to do with free speech. Stop being obtuse.
someone with a bullhorn proselytizing at 3:00 AM from the street
Disturbing the peace. Doesn't matter whether they're blessing everyone or quoting Mein Kampf.
And if someone breaks into your home
Breaking and entering, obviously, trespassing etc. Has nothing to do with speech.
Try harder
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Monday September 19 2016, @03:01AM
I have seen (well not directly because I was excluded) safe spaces work. As an AC pointed out, "Safe spaces" are actually relatively mundane.
When a group wants to meet for a particular purpose, everybody who will disrupt that purpose is specifically excluded. This even works in the corner case of a group of 1.
When you need to have a bowel movement, most people seek out a toilet that has been set up as a "safe space" for that purpose. The room often has specialized equipment to safely handle the waste.
In the group context, "safe spaces" are essential to preserve the freedom of assembly. If your group wants to effect change, you must first decide what steps to take in a environment where you can talk without getting shouted down.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @06:35AM
How droll.
My shoe is a safe space for my foot. My brain is a safe space for my thoughts. My nose a safe space for my snot...
How far do you want to take this?