User Banned (5 days): trolling in a sensitive thread
Nintendo doing what Nintendo does. We need protection from these things gang. I'll be the first to thank them.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Nintendo took down a Smash stage containing trans flag and suspended the player that posted it because it was considered a "political statement"
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
I wanna know this if someone made a stage that's anti-trans, I'm pretty sure it would be treated in the same way as this stage, so basically taking sides is a political thing, doing this is only Nintendo being neutral, you can't define what's right and what's wrong with many of the situations on this topic, but I don't see problem with them being cautious, let's say putting a religious symbol in there making a stage with the word "Allahu Akbar" ,"i love jesus" or something, that would be a cause of a ban and am pretty sure of that, and it is as much a political statement as the trans flag.
Being against trans people is bigotry. There's no being "neutral" on this issue.
User Banned (permanent): Downplaying Transphobia over a series of posts, account in junior phase
I agree with you, but not accepting sides because, they just dont want to be involved in this situation, it not bigotry, being anti-trans is, keeping it even between both sides, is right way to go about it, if the situation was reversed, and the stage that went down was anti-trans you would be applauding Nintendo, when Nintendo would put it down on the same category of offenses, but no one would be asking this question and Nintendo will come out as the Hero of Trans community and so forth, and let's say this situation happened a week later where they took down the trans flag stage? would you be as pissed off ?
Dude what?
Yes being okay with bigotry is bigotry. What are you even saying here?
Yup it's on Nintendo to clear things up even it was just a bad mod and some trolls
No, how are they being ok with bigotry ? if the situation was the reverse it would be the same result, you are not being fair here, I was taught to be fair and view thing in a fair manner, you dont go around the would and force certain views, and to make it clearer, let's take it one step further, let's say you are an atheist/agnostic or a theist to make it simple, most of theistic religions that exist in our world are homo/trans- phobic religions, so if you were a theist which is very big portion of this world it is a the norm that there is transphobia and homophobia, ok, let's say you were an agnostic or an atheist, you dont believe in a God, and you don't believe in anything, now give me any reason that anything wrong in this world is bad, and I can bring you logical argument that everything that you might deem bad is actually good and advantageous for you to survive live a wealthy life whatever you can imagine, I'm just stating these things to show you can't claim that something is bad or something is good, let me state bluntly a world with no God is a grey world, that anything can go situation, so in both situation you can't stand in any moral ground to defend what you defend because it will just crumble at some point, when it comes to this try to view this in a fair manner instead of shooting your opinion everywhere, being neutral is perfectly ok in this situation, considering that a huge portion of people who buy Nintendo are of religious background and these things are not deemed ok, you might call them bigots and throw insult at their religion but it's a realistic world we live in not some fantasy world where everything you deem right is right and everything you deem wrong is wrong, Nintendo after all is a mega corporation and having a stance will hurt their sales, while not having one will make them ambiguous. as long it doesn't offend anyone it's ok after all.
Mate, you either support the right of human beings to express who they are in a manner that isn't harmful or you don't, that's what trans rights is all about. There's no neutral here, taking a neutral stance is only beneficial to those who don't support those rights, as not speaking up for the oppressed only continues the oppression.
Wish the ban statement said this guy was gone for posting some of the worst run on sentences I've ever seen. Good riddance.
She'll you're banned, but I'll just leave this here in case you ever see it.
Just replace swap in new minorities and their oppressors where applicable.
Still no comment from nintendo? Any other stages been taken down either?
I mean, he's definitely not wrong. Apathy and not wanting to rock the boat I think are two of the most dangerous things when it comes to minorities fighting for their right to exist.
She'll you're banned, but I'll just leave this here in case you ever see it.
Just replace swap in new minorities and their oppressors where applicable.
I mean, he's definitely not wrong. Apathy and not wanting to rock the boat I think are two of the most dangerous things when it comes to minorities fighting for their right to exist.
It is Easter weekend. You'll probably wanna wait til the right people are at work at least.
So it is a terrible look and I hope the stage can be reuploaded. Considering there are other trans-flag stages still up, it's most logical to believe that this was done erroneously due to it being flagged by numerous people for some reason.
Uh, how would she know the rep who helped her was fired?
Uh, how would she know the rep who helped her was fired?
Yeah I'd be very cautious with believing this at face value. Also it appears to still be under review so let's wait to see what happens
Yeah, I wonder how they heard about it. As someone who has worked the CS side of things in the past, the employment status of another employee is absolutely not something you share or discuss with customers over the phone. If they did, that would be extremely unprofessional.
Reading through that tweet chain I'm a little skeptical. No company would ever discuss the ramifications of someone they dealt with other than a vague "we will be discussing/coaching/educating our representative" statement. She goes on to mention this wouldn't be the first time this happened and cites what went on with Allison Rapp which happened years and years ago.
This makes no sense. I don't even know how people put it as if it's NCL when this is made by a random guy in NOA, it had just one case, the other flags are okay on the same game with and Splatoon 2 have them normally out there.
User Banned (2 Weeks): Excusing transphobia. Account in junior phase.
I am never quick to join an online lynchmob. I can also se the argument of keeping Nintendo vidya games clean of all somewhat related things. I'm all for gay rights and rights for everyone to be treated equal buy expressing it there might be like raising a flag in Disney world.
If Disney want to do it they would do it and not let anyone do it. Just how companies work, they want to control their intellectual properties and only take stands when it's coming from themselves. Nintendo probably isn't against trans or gay rights, it just that they don't want to lose control over the statements that are coming from their creation and therefore could reflect on them.
If Disney want to do it they would do it and not let anyone do it. Just how companies work, they want to control their intellectual properties and only take stands when it's coming from themselves. Nintendo probably isn't against trans or gay rights, it just that they don't want to lose control over the statements that are coming from their creation and therefore could reflect on them.
How does this person know that the employee was fired?
That's fucking weird.
Like almost making no sense at all weird.
That's fucking weird.
Like almost making no sense at all weird.
The employee in question could have privately contacted her on Twitter (though if your argument is, like, how do we know it's not someone trying to spoof the rep, I don't disagree with you there)
That update #3 makes no sense. In addition to the fact that this person should have 0 idea that someone lost their job over it, it's also an insane reason to fire someone. Even if that customer service rep did break some sort of job rules by doing what they did (which I don't see much sign of given what was said, telling someone they can appeal a decision they disagree with and how to do so is pretty standard practice) firing someone for one offense, moderate is super unlikely. The only way that makes sense is if this rep had a history of breaking rules and going beyond what they were allowed to say, at which case it becomes less "they got fired over me" and more "they were sort of a rogue rep."
I don't believe it either way. This scenario just doesn't feel true to me. It reeks of someone trying to sensationalize a good story, going too far to try to rile up support and interest. "Good people are losing their jobs over this!" and so quickly. Mmmmm I doubt it. Unfortunately it casts doubt over the entire story too - after all, if someone's willing to lie to tell a good story, how do we know where the lies begin and end?
I don't believe it either way. This scenario just doesn't feel true to me. It reeks of someone trying to sensationalize a good story, going too far to try to rile up support and interest. "Good people are losing their jobs over this!" and so quickly. Mmmmm I doubt it. Unfortunately it casts doubt over the entire story too - after all, if someone's willing to lie to tell a good story, how do we know where the lies begin and end?
The update feels odd? How in the world does she know? Who told her? Why did they tell her?
Mind you, I still believe that Nintendo acted like a piece of shit and took down the stage, I'm just more confused about this update than anything.
Mind you, I still believe that Nintendo acted like a piece of shit and took down the stage, I'm just more confused about this update than anything.
Honestly the main reason I believe it is the precedent we've seen in firing folks like Allison Rapp. I'm quite willing to buy the rogue rep idea (i.e., this wasn't specifically the thing the rep got fired for but represented a pattern of behavior that Nintendo took issue with).
They would jeopardize their job leaking this information? There is usually confidentiality agreements, especially if this came from HR
I feel the same way. Now I'm wondering what this person is playing at.
Sure. It could be a rogue rep. That's why I brought it up as a possibility.
In that case though, it's just someone doing their job badly. It's not about Nintendo then and its not about trans rights. It's just someone who's bad at their job and doesn't have one anymore. Which would make this even less of a story than it is now.
Hmmm, it's interesting that they also mention Allison Rapp. It makes me question this update even more...
Allison Rapp was fired because she was moonlighting as an escort (moonlighting alone is prohibited at Nintendo), sold sexy pics and had written a thesis where she argued for less strict laws regarding children sexual depiction and agency. I think it's quite natural that Nintendo wouldn't want a PR like that.
Not that it justified all the assholes harassing her of course, nor do I have any problem with sex work.
I forgot to say before but much like the thing with Smash and Spirit mode, Nintendo only will really respond if this gets traction like Game&Watch for example. Much like the thing with the spirits, this so far is getting no real repercussion.
maybe she called support and asked to speak to the same supervisor by name before learning that that particular employee is no longer with the company
This... Nintendo would never release that information, and if the rep in question contacted them, they in no way implied it nor gave any proof that they did, or that they were who they said they were.
I was all on board with this being a bad actor in Nintendo's moderation team, but this update has me questioning all of it.
#1: Nintendo would almost certainly not say this.
#2: Even if they DID say it, that's a really huge logic leap for them to make. "Nintendo said they no longer work for the company, so that obviously means Nintendo fired them for escalating my issue!"
This is starting to sound suspect...why would they possibly tell some random person a supervisor was fired?
There is and its spectacuar
Somehow reminds me of Pushmo.
I don't know if HR policy allows them to share that at all. At most they might tell her that rep is not in; if they want to walk on thin ice, they can tell her they're no longer with the company, as you said, but no reason would be shared, in which case this is extrapolation and presumption of intent (I..e., what if Thursday was always the last day for that employee, and they knew which is why they were willing to be so frank with her?)
I don't see how they would blame a supervisor who tried to help???
Yeah, I just went with it initially but the update makes me doubt the whole thing.
"So I know my bosses are listening in, but I'm totally going to get in trouble for doing my job and looking into why your stage got banned while hundreds of other similar ones did not."
The next day...
"Yeah we fired that previous person for doing their job. Oh, we probably shouldn't have told you that... but I'm sure you won't go on twitter and tell everyone."
This story is not adding up anymore...
(edit) wait wait wait... I missed this mixed in with other replies...
None of this is adding up anymore at all.
The next day...
"Yeah we fired that previous person for doing their job. Oh, we probably shouldn't have told you that... but I'm sure you won't go on twitter and tell everyone."
This story is not adding up anymore...
(edit) wait wait wait... I missed this mixed in with other replies...
None of this is adding up anymore at all.
The logic is that someone else on the internet told her that the person was fired. She's taking it with a grain of salt, but felt that the supervisor was already going beyond what their job should allow, so if they were fired, it wouldn't surprise her. Nintendo's official statement is that they're still looking into the matter, but no, she didn't call them up and have someone working customer service tell her that they were fired. You guys are a little too eager to dismiss this entire story when it's just her believing something a stranger told her about it
As I said I explicitly still believe that the stage was deleted. The latest update confused me. My confusion over this update doesn't undermine my belief in the earlier set of circumstances having transpired in the slightest.
We're to eager to question the emerging highly dubious parts of her story as opposed to this person being eager to believe a stranger on the internet?