Slashdot Mirror
The Washington Post Decries 'Toxicity' in Videogames (siliconvalley.com)
This week the Washington Post shared the story of 20-year-old Sam Haberern, who was playing Call of Duty on his Xbox when the other players "started asking him whether he had ever testified in court or murdered anyone."
"They said they were from Maryland and that they were going to come and kill me," he said. By then it was 3 a.m., and Haberern decided to quit. One of the gamers in the party then sent him a message via Xbox Live. It contained his home address. Next his house phone rang, then his mother's cellphone. A message appeared on his TV screen from one of the party members -- it was asking why he didn't answer... Haberern contacted Microsoft, which makes Xbox, via its website and reported what happened. Unsatisfied with that process, he then typed a Reddit post, which would go viral, asking what recourse was available to him. The varied and ultimately unsatisfying answers centered on a common theme: There was no good solution.
Toxic behavior in competitive activities is not a new development, nor is it exclusive to video gaming, as social media users can attest. But its persistence amid a rapidly rising medium -- both in terms of users and revenue -- spotlights the question of why undesirable or, in some cases, criminal interactions have been so difficult for the video-game industry or law enforcement to eliminate. Now, with technological advances in online multiplayer games and video gaming's increased prevalence worldwide, a growing percentage of the population is becoming unwittingly exposed to a slew of abusive acts that are only becoming more visible. While game publishers, console makers, online voice-chat applications and even the FBI are aware of these issues and working to confront them, complications stemming from modern technology and gaming practices, freedom of speech concerns, and a lack of chargeable offenses on the legal side make toxic elements a challenge to extinguish.... Ambiguities within the U.S. legal system have played a role in constraining the efforts of law enforcement during the era of online gaming.
After the death threats, Haberern didn't contact the police, but questioned whether Microsoft was creating a safe environment for kids.
The next day, he was back to playing videogames. "But I definitely don't accept invites from people."
Toxic behavior in competitive activities is not a new development, nor is it exclusive to video gaming, as social media users can attest. But its persistence amid a rapidly rising medium -- both in terms of users and revenue -- spotlights the question of why undesirable or, in some cases, criminal interactions have been so difficult for the video-game industry or law enforcement to eliminate. Now, with technological advances in online multiplayer games and video gaming's increased prevalence worldwide, a growing percentage of the population is becoming unwittingly exposed to a slew of abusive acts that are only becoming more visible. While game publishers, console makers, online voice-chat applications and even the FBI are aware of these issues and working to confront them, complications stemming from modern technology and gaming practices, freedom of speech concerns, and a lack of chargeable offenses on the legal side make toxic elements a challenge to extinguish.... Ambiguities within the U.S. legal system have played a role in constraining the efforts of law enforcement during the era of online gaming.
After the death threats, Haberern didn't contact the police, but questioned whether Microsoft was creating a safe environment for kids.
The next day, he was back to playing videogames. "But I definitely don't accept invites from people."
Show me one major race that's never engaged in those activities. Don't forget, it wasn't white people doing the actual capturing and enslaving during colonial times. Those slaves were captured by other Africans, then sold (and mostly not to America, then whites in Europe banned it first). Today, white people engage in less of the kind of behavior you're describing than any other race in power in a large area. Blacks oppress other blacks in Africa far more than whites oppress blacks in America; like we have no groups kidnapping female schoolchildren for the crime of getting educated. Asians in China oppress other Asians (e.g. the Uighurs) more than any group is oppressing anyone anywhere; even the Japanese sharply limit the rights of foreign ethnicities in the country (especially non-white ones).
The reality is, the white countries in North America and Europe offer more help, rights, and equality to other races immigrating and living in their countries, and foreign aid to countries where other races live in poverty, than any other race.
This is why people have a problem with the moronic sjw narrative that white people are the worlds greatest evil. It's not that white countries have completely achieved equality and aren't doing anything wrong, it's that they've accomplished more in that direction than any other group. And yes built (or designed, if you want to attribute the building to labor of others) what we call modern civilization. Despite the various atrocities involved in doing that, you're going to lose the argument that nonwhite groups would have suffered less or suffer less today had that progress not been made. And also the ridiculous notion that if one group oppressing another are the same color it's no big deal compared to if one group is white and one is not.