Rare Needs to Address the Controversy Surrounding a Certain Streamer

@tre-oni said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

I still think these would have been better off just staying easter eggs, and not content trying to draw attention to them now...

Then this wouldn't even matter lol

This is probably the sentiment I agree with most about this update.

The Player Immortalizations were better as unspoken, subtle little hints in the world that you would have to ask around about in the community.

Turning them into actual mainline content for the game just spoils the mystique of these Easter eggs. As hard as they tried to make it fit seamlessly into the world in a way that makes sense, it still feels extremely out of place to me as in game content that is acknowledged by the game and its NPCs.

I appreciate Rare and love this game, but this update just isn't doing it for me. Really excited to buy the Elemental Powers ship and the new generic Pirate Clothes though!

@gundy-the-shark Though the call-out does directly refer to in-game content.

Certain content immortalizes a player; OP takes issue with the player being immortalized, and is concerned that Rare is neglecting to address the situation appropriately.

It's a tricky situation, and I don't envy the mods for having to decide where the line is crossed, especially considering the latter concern.

@theunionjames

The people in the wrong are the ones who decided to take action based on her accusations.

With respect James, that isn't how reality works. Compare it to this real life thing, Filing a False Police Report. Their actions (The Streamer) in this case led to consequences for someone, who was not allowed any form of due process. While certainly the ones who took action are at fault, but that doesn't mean the accusers hands are clean.

@captainfuriosa

@gundy-the-shark Yeah so "you can name a player on this forum as long as it's to say only good about it."

No freedom of speech tho... :(

This isn't America my dude, but an independent company not obligated to provide free speech. Their platform their choice, hell, its even an UK company.

@mr-dragon-raaar said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@bugaboo-bill
From what I understand she was just as bad, if not worse.
She "lost" and then cried foul. There was no evidence of sniping (I dont understand why these privileged streamers need protection anyway. Put yourself out there and get what you deserve).
She then spoke to her contact at Rare and proceeded to gloat about it.

It set a disgusting precedent which is only going to be worse now with the elitist partner programme.
Rare should be ashamed but instead continue to pander to these nobodies.

The easter eggs added just for being a streamer are a joke. Only a matter of time before theres a statue of Pace and commendations for bowing down to him so we can all emulate Joe and his ilk.
Disgraceful.

yep next update feb 15 pace statue is coming and we have to bow down to it lol

@captainfuriosa said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@cokney-charmer Don't worry man I know forums, been moderating on forums my whole teenager years. And you're right, signing the agreement to use these forums can mean going agains't freespeech in order to keep the forums calm. I just think witch hunting is a matter of interpretation and can be unfair sometimes. :)

Free speech, as you misunderstand it, only applies in some regions. Rare is a UK studio/company and, similar to a lot of European countries, the UK actually has almost the opposite set of laws when it comes to libel laws. In the US, it's up to the accused to prove innocence, over here it's up to the accuser to prove their claim.

Also free speech in the US constitution only allows you to say something, it doesn't prevent others from moderating you if they deem your comment not appropriate to their community.

@klutchxking518 said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@phantaxus believe its on salty sands. Dunno.

no that's the harpoon meg

@closinghare208 said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

yep next update feb 15 pace statue is coming and we have to bow down to it lol

Every player logging in gets a free "Kneel in Contrition" emote, which can be used at the statue to earn a 100 doubloon commendation lol.

@chronodusk said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@closinghare208 said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

yep next update feb 15 pace statue is coming and we have to bow down to it lol

Every player logging in gets a free "Kneel in Contrition" emote, which can be used at the stature to earn a 100 doubloon commendation lol.

lol

@realstyli

In the US, it's up to the accused to prove innocence,

I think you have it backwards or at the least your terms mixed mate, The foundation of law is Innocent until proven guilty. So the person accused, as in the one on trial, would be innocent until the Accuser, the one making the claim, provides evidence.

An example would be me calling you a fraud, its not your job to prove you aren't one, but mine to prove you are.

@tre-oni said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@closinghare208 said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@mr-dragon-raaar said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@bugaboo-bill
From what I understand she was just as bad, if not worse.
She "lost" and then cried foul. There was no evidence of sniping (I dont understand why these privileged streamers need protection anyway. Put yourself out there and get what you deserve).
She then spoke to her contact at Rare and proceeded to gloat about it.

It set a disgusting precedent which is only going to be worse now with the elitist partner programme.
Rare should be ashamed but instead continue to pander to these nobodies.

The easter eggs added just for being a streamer are a joke. Only a matter of time before theres a statue of Pace and commendations for bowing down to him so we can all emulate Joe and his ilk.
Disgraceful.

yep next update feb 15 pace statue is coming and we have to bow down to it lol

Hahaha you guys loved that line in the other thread eh?

It really does sum up how I feel about turning these eastereggs into "content", especially drawing attention to and basically now advertising these goofy streamers in game.

yep that's what it is now rare's like streamers saved the game and we have to give them easter eggs

@nabberwar said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@realstyli

In the US, it's up to the accused to prove innocence,

I think you have it backwards or at the least your terms mixed mate, The foundation of law is Innocent until proven guilty. So the person accused, as in the one on trial, would be innocent until the Accuser, the one making the claim, provides evidence.

An example would be me calling you a fraud, its not your job to prove you aren't one, but mine to prove you are.

Maybe, I just know the differences are significant when it comes to those laws and "free speech" is not a thing here. Hence why we have a lot of injunctions and "super injunctions" preventing the press from publishing news articles unless they have significant evidence.

@gundy-the-shark said:

In this case though, you can still point to the Easter egg without naming who it refers to... and it doesn't break any rules

Agreed.

Still not a nice thing to do if it’s to attack the subject of the Easter egg.

I don't think that's a fair interpretation of the original post, though we can agree to disagree there lol. I read it as an attack on the decision to immortalize the player, not a direct attack on the player.

Can you make such an argument without naming the player at all? Sure.

@theblackbellamy I’d like to confirm, for what is probably the 5th time since I made this post, that I am more mad at Rare for this than I am the streamer. The streamer may have done wrong, but Rare acted unprofessionally, failed to provide due process, and then pretended it never happened. In my eyes, that’s much worse than the report that got the players banned

@captainfuriosa said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@nabberwar I'm a french girl bruh, freedom of speech is a thing in Europe too ôo
Hell, you could even insult my president Macron in front of him you won't go to jail for this lol

lol now go away or I shall taut you a second timea

@realstyli
As an American, I can confidently say that Americans don't understand what Free Speech means. I won't pretend to understand UK laws when I am not one, but I found that it was key to point out the claim on American law.

No harm no foul.

@blaizent sure it doesn’t, keep tellin ya self that, and I Simply said I wouldn’t worry about Sea streamers now in any way then the reason.

@nabberwar said in A Certain Streamer Should Not Have Been Immortalized in Sea of Thieves:

@realstyli
As an American, I can confidently say that Americans don't understand what Free Speech means. I won't pretend to understand UK laws when I am not one, but I found that it was key to point out the claim on American law.

No harm no foul.

in Canada we have to have the same opinion as everyone else or we get witch hunted for our different opinion