Always harder in the heat of the moment, but yeah, I need to put up a better troll filter.

They’ll boycott Blizzard again, of course.

If Blizzard did nothing, that would be tacit approval of political speech in their streams. Imagine what that would mean in the next election.

Civil disobedience works when there’s risk involved. Blitzchung risked something, which is fine. He did so by breaking his contract, and receiving the contractual punishment, which is fine. Allowing any idiot with an axe to grind to say what they like isn’t what a Hearthstone stream is for.

The argument is literally about people shoving their politics into entertainment streams. I’m sorry you can’t tell the difference between that and butchering religious groups for their organs.

People are arguing for being able to insert politics into Blizzard’s entertainment streams whenever they want. That’s literally what this is all about, and what I’m protesting against.

China is disgusting. The massacre should have had a greater response at the time, and China’s actions now merit a much, much larger response than has occurred.

Right. Here I thought you were interested in political theory, but I guess you wanted to be condescending instead. And no, they don’t have bigger concerns, because they have invested nothing. They are bitching about Blizzard, not aiding Hong Kong, as I outlined, and Blizzard is NOT a bigger concern than China.

No, it doesn’t. People need to mentally recharge, and should be allowed to do so. Being angry all the time is exhausting. When people take a moment to recharge so they can get back to it, it’s both infuriating and exhausting to have it thrust back in their face. It’s literally detrimental to the cause.

That’s not what people are speaking out in favor of. If they were, they’d be talking about Hong Kong, not an entertainment company. They are talking about the right to use a corporation’s private property for civil disobedience without risk and the ability to violate a contract without repercussions.

No, because the pledge drive is expected. This is someone going on, say, Fresh Air for a live interview, and instead spending the entire time talking about how trans people aren’t being treated properly. It’s a worthy cause, but it’s not what we went to hear, or related to what’s going on.

Sure, civil disobedience, that’s fine. But the methods of this civil disobedience are empty, hollow, and not actually contributing to anything. Internet posts are not what Thoreau had in mind when he wrote about civil disobedience, because such acts derive their power from the risk involved. If you take time off to…

I’ve already contributed to the protests, with my wallet, even though I can’t actually afford it. Have you?

My position is:

China is disgusting and needs to be dealt with. You don’t need to parade around the list of offenses every time someone stops to take a break. If you can’t handle that, you’ll wind up being dismissed as an asshole, even by the people who agree with you. Like me.

The argument is literally about whether people can shove politics in the faces of others using another person’s private property to do so.

With what, Blizzard’s private army? Taking away a single game when China already has an immense entertainment industry? Idealism is great, but it needs to be grounded, kid.

My personal politics has me donating to the cause and not shoving them in other peoples’ faces at inappropriate times. Yours is to accuse people of believing in things they don’t because they disagree with your methods.

Yeah, maybe return to politics when you can act like an actual adult.

Your position is literally that people have a right to use private property to spread their politics regardless of the wishes of the owner of that property or the audience that is there. I support the shit out of Hong Kong, but I don’t support that.