It’s important to be said that you have to be very careful when playing a satire character, because if you’re not you will just become the satire character. Larry the Cable Guy is not even from the south. If you’re doing something ironically or you like something ironically you have to make sure that it’s something that you’re okay with doing unironically or that you really take care to separate yourself from that thing in certain ways otherwise you will start to believe, like, and/or do those things unironically
Actual proof of what? That Dr. Disrespect sent private messages to a minor? I guess I would take him at his own word since he tweeted about it admitting it hours ago.
I hadn’t seen the post on Twitter, I don’t use Twitter. Looks like he posted that about an hour before I commented, so it’s not like you’d expect everyone in the world to have seen it.
Having read it I’ve obviously got new information and can update my opinion accordingly.
To be clear, though, he hadn’t made this statement until today, and so everyone until now was acting based on hearsay, not proof.
Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual minor back in 2017? The answer is yes. Were there real intentions behind these messages, the answer is absolutely not. These were casual, mutual conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate, but nothing more.
what? he said it himself. he admitted, today, in his OWN words he had inappropriate chats with a minor. What more proof do you need? Like if someone came up to you and said “you know essteeyou, I did this” you’d be like “well you allegedly did it”. cope some more bro, cope some more.
So he was messaging a minor and Twitch just got him off their platform and nothing more happened? No repercussions for what he was allegedly doing from a legal standpoint?
Twitch probably doesn't care beyond reputational damage/liability.
a settled lawsuit between Twitch and Beahm, where neither party admitted to any wrongdoing, and his contract was paid.
In fact it sounds like Twitch made an effort to keep it quiet, which was successful until these former employees spoke out (hope they don't suffer consequences)
Edit to add: Which is not to say there couldn't be separate consequences. It's just not going to come from Twitch. I'm sure a certain three letter agency is quite a bit more interested in Beahm now.
If Twitch helped to cover up a criminal act, they’d be opening themselves up to liability. Especially since they supposedly provide the product used for the communication AND apparently knew about it.
The simpler answer is, the reality isn’t as simple as the tweet makes it out to be. Twitch may have thought/known the user was a minor based off internal-only information, like previous messages, account information, etc. not anything in the conversation with Doc. In that case Doc would not have known they were a minor, and thus his actions would not have been illegal, and it would not be a story at all if Twitch reached out to advise Doc that the user was a minor… instead Twitch acted unilaterally and essentially burned the contract in the process. That would fit the same “facts” we’ve been told from all parties, but with a vastly different context that also matches the lack of criminal liability.
So what would he do that’s not illegal but bad enough to get banned? What would he do that would also explain why people are saying he was messaging minors for a meet up? Why would Twitch pay out the contract?
So what would he do that’s not illegal but bad enough to get banned?
Twitch is a private platform, they could ban him for whatever reason they wanted.
Disney dropped Johnny Depp because of the Amber Heard thing, but what did he do to deserve that? Twitch dropping Dr. Disrespect was probably entirely about optics.
I don’t know anything about him, I don’t watch him or anything. But if he did break the law, he absolutely would have been arrested. AFAIK, sexual assault/misconduct or whatever with a minor doesn’t have a stipulation that the minor can choose to not press charges, thats up to the prosecuting attorney. They almost always press charges, and they should. So if something illegal did infact take place, he would have been arrested.
Most of the times when people get busted for “chatting” to kids online, it’s because the child is actually a law enforcement officer who has gotten the person to admit their intent in a way that isn’t legally questionable.
Even if twitch reported the allegations to law enforcement, it’s unlikely any prosecutor is going to bring up charges on a famous/wealthy person unless they have an open and shut case. Which is really rare outside of sting operations.
Eh, it could be a multitude of reasons. It could be that they just had a bad contract. Even if there is a morality clause, how that morality clause is enacted may be dependent on actual charges being filed.
It is possible they had a reasonable concern about the situation, but it wasn’t drastic enough for them to legally terminate the contract. Wanting to save face in this scenario isn’t exactly too hard to imagine considering their demographics.
Or it could be that it was simply cheaper to pay the rest of the contract than it would to arbitrate in court. Or they may have feared themselves being further implicated during a proceeding if someone at twitch enabled or tried to cover it up.
honestly the only way people will 100% be able to understand as to why they’d have to see the contract Twitch had with Guy at the time. I wouldn’t put it past twitch if they had a really loose and shitty contract. could simply be a matter of “we want you off the platform, we weren’t smart enough to have a solid mortality clause if any at all, so we have to pay out the rest of your term”.
and Guy could have been speaking the truth when he originally said 4 years ago he didn’t know why he was banned. They could have simply banned him and hoped he wouldn’t fight it. He threatens to take them to court for the money he feels he’s owed and rather than potentially expose the victim they just decided to settle.
I mean knowing Guy’s fanbase that’s the route I would have personally taken. The last thing I would want is some kid that Guy was sexting to be potentially exposed and then harassed or threatened by insane 30+ year old dudes. it’s happened before in cases like this.
It’s insane what these people do. They’re rewriting code from the 60s to use even less memory, have to test it in production without physical access, and it takes two days to see if anything changes. It’s an insane piece of engineering and it’s incredible that it’s still sending useful data.
I’d love to see what their test environments are like. You can’t test everything, but they can certainly test some things. A raspberry pi has more software capability.
You got to take that up with the Microsoft executive who wrote it. It’s physical media, so Microsoft has less control over it, which they clearly don’t like.
For anyone done buying discs, it’s a removed point of failure in the device. The Series S sold well, so if your point is “No one wants a digital console”, then no, you are wrong.
People wanted more storage in existing models
For a lot of people, the $100 difference between models is a heavy consideration. Anything that can get trimmed out may make them more likely to buy.
Edit: looks like the old series x was 499 but is on sale for 449 basically everywhere. The new discless series x is 449, but will prob be on sale for 400 in a few months.
Ownership of the people, not of corporations. Why do you think they are always trying to “seize the means of production”? To give ownership to a big mega Corp like msft? Nope
Pretendo here. Sorry, but this comment has been removed for the reasons of “slander” as stick drift has never existed in our products in the first place.
theverge.com
Gorące