I don’t think you accurately read their comment.

They’re not spending years in development planning and creating new, exciting content. They’re holding back basic features from the beginning and selling them to you over time for many times the base game’s price.

deleted by creator

I believe they’ve completely lost the plot. They invoked the word “Wikipedia” as a cited source, they were unable to follow any point being made, but their comment in a different thread from a couple hours ago actually helped me start to understand what’s going on:

They started calling everyone a misogynist for no obvious reason. They were unable to communicate their thoughts in a meaningful way or interpret information presented to them.

Further, 17 hours ago, on a post that was clearly pro-piracy and not AI related at all, they commented, “AntiAI bros raging at this.” There’s zero relationship to the post.

I’m seeing a trend where they have their own opinions (censorship is always bad, misogyny is bad, AI is good) and then decide to share those opinions with tangential or no connection to that which they’re replying. They’re also fond of personal attacks and several common argument fallacies. Their comment history reads like a tribute to /r/im13andthisisdeep.

I hope it’s merely age and maturity-related and not something more permanent.

I think it’s ok for the owners of a privately owned platform to make decisions for that platform. If they want to exclusively show nudity, GTA6, or drying paint, I’m all for their autonomy.

Your autonomy allows you to utilize their platform or not based on their choices. If the absence of a focus on the groin, butt, and breasts on a green screen offends your values, I would suggest not visiting Twitch.

To bring it back your original comment, enjoying a platform’s decision to desexualize content while also being opposed to a government ban on violent video games is perfectly reasonable. The two scenarios are entirely different in scope and and context.

You made it a 1st amendment topic by comparing private platform censorship to banning violent video games, which would be a government action that eventually gets a lawsuit seen before the supreme court.

I’m not trying to convince you of anything. I make it a point not argue with people who resort to name calling and shaming others - these people aren’t here to debate facts or allow their opinions to be changed.

I’m providing a counterpoint to your erroneous logic for other people to see and choose for themselves.

Banning violent video games is government censorship and is a 1st amendment issue.

Banning certain behaviors on their own platform is entirely the perogative of the platform owners.

The two are not alike whatsoever.

Your argument is akin to saying that not allowing strangers to fill your home and smoke crack is “censorship” and is “just so dumb.”

Disagreeing with the rule or the underlying reasoning is anyone’s right, but disagreeing with a private owner’s right to decide who and what is allowed on their property is insincere at best as you would never agree to your own rights being infringed.

If their model was simply, “were going to pay you to stream,” then it would instantly be another egirl cam site which is not inherently right or wrong.

They don’t want that. It’s their platform, their server space, and their rules. Similar to who you allow in your home and what you allow them to do, they decide who and what if allowed on their platform.

The “why” doesn’t even matter. Maybe it’s run by a far right Christian. Maybe they don’t want the liability. Maybe they have a vision for what their platform is and isn’t. It doesn’t matter. It’s their property and they decide what’s allowed.

And he knows how many seconds it’ll take to kill a room of armed thugs