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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @12:23AM
I expect we're close to the point where product reviews will be closely moderated to weed out the hostile and uninformed crap that you often find.
Or maybe people can grow a spine and stop expecting that they never be allowed to see hostile and uninformed crap (though mere hostility is not necessarily "crap"). Their expectations are wildly unrealistic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @12:52AM
More often than not, the problem is not people who need to "grow a spine" but rather people who post hostile and uninformed crap on review sites just for the lulz. The only thing such people contribute is white noise. The problem that needs addressing is how to cut down on that white noise so that real discussion can be allowed to continue. That is the issue. Or, so it seems to me.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 19 2016, @01:09AM
Yeah, pretty much nobody does that for the lulz. They do it because a product offends them. Just like every consumer group ever. They simply have a different style of communication.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @05:52AM
I would rather risk the chance of encountering content you subjectively deem "noise" than seeing some censored/watered-down discussion. I greatly prefer how SoylentNews handles things.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 19 2016, @02:40PM
it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer
Benjamin Franklin, [wikipedia.org] though various other people have phrased it similarly before and after it sounds like
It is more important that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world, that all of them cannot be punished. ... when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the subject will exclaim, 'it is immaterial to me whether I behave well or ill, for virtue itself is no security.' And if such a sentiment as this were to take hold in the mind of the subject that would be the end of all security whatsoever.
John Adams
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @05:10PM
I'm not following your "logic" here. We are discussing online reviews. Specifically, bogus reviews added by people who never used the product. Specifically, bogus reviews posted by people who never used the product just to have a few lulz in taking down a product. This is not a courtroom, so what we might charitably refer to your analogy fails. Furthermore, in a courtroom there is this rather important guy called a judge. He gets to decide what the opposing attorneys get to say in his courtroom. Woe betide thee if you should decide that you are going to try trolling him. Trust me, it just won't go over too well. Yes, the judge has near god-like powers to moderate the discussion in his courtroom, even to the point of indefinitely jailing offenders.