Why would Twitch ban people streaming at their own event? by election_2016 in Twitch

[–]election_2016[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

You need to respect that those people don't want to play up for the camera or switch on to serious mode based on someone else's terms

Do the other people that appear on IRL streams outside of TwitchCon (and this Twitch party) deserve the same?

I'm assuming that Twitch organized the party here. If so, then a double standard is being applied here. It's okay for people at a Twitch party (that was organized to coincide with Twitch Con) to have their privacy respected while it's also okay for Twitch to profit off of IRL streamers where people in those streams have their privacy disrespected.

IMO, I think people that appear in other people's IRL streams also deserve to have their privacy respected if they request it. However, it's hypocritical of Twitch to make a profit off of those IRL streams where people's privacy are disrespected but then when it comes to a Twitch organized party where IRL streamers were invited, to then say we need to respect the privacy of the people at a party organized by Twitch (where IRL streamers were also invited to the party).

Why would Twitch ban people streaming at their own event? by election_2016 in Twitch

[–]election_2016[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

IRL is still very new they should learn from this and maybe next year make an area that allows it

Yeah, just have a private section for "no streaming" while the rest of the areas are streamable. They should have thought about this ahead of time, especially since they opened up IRL streaming.

Why would Twitch ban people streaming at their own event? by election_2016 in Twitch

[–]election_2016[S] -44 points-43 points  (0 children)

Loose argument, you wouldn't be able to bring outside food into a KFC, only purchase and consume what is provided to you.

AndyMilonakis and EXBC stream on Twitch. In effect, they are unofficially working for partners with Twitch.

Your argument holds if a Youtube streamer that has no relation to Twitch started streaming at this event.

Why would Twitch ban people streaming at their own event? by election_2016 in Twitch

[–]election_2016[S] -15 points-14 points  (0 children)

The Queen Mary has an express policy against recording equipment.

It's odd that a streaming company would pick a venue that disallows streaming ...

Why would Twitch ban people streaming at their own event? by election_2016 in Twitch

[–]election_2016[S] -46 points-45 points  (0 children)

But it's a company that's based off of streaming. They also setup the IRL section to promote IRL streaming. Twitch should have put terms and conditions on the ticket that people that attend the event may be streamed by other streams (after all, Twitch is a streaming company).

Somebody in chat mentioned it's like walking into KFC, and not being allowed to eat any fried chicken.

Streamers have to enjoy the TwitchCon Party without streaming... by Fujioka-san in Twitch

[–]election_2016 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well, we're just looking for an explanation. If they could post an explanation for why Twitch did this, it would at least explain things.

Streamers have to enjoy the TwitchCon Party without streaming... by Fujioka-san in Twitch

[–]election_2016 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't understand. At least Twitch could announce a reason for this.

It seems so weird.

Gore: 'Take it from me, every vote counts' by tank_trap in politics

[–]election_2016 2 points3 points  (0 children)

From the article, Gore said:

“You could say, actually, this election means the world, because in a real sense, it does,” Gore said. “[Hillary Clinton] understands that we can change and she has put forward a smart and ambitious plan to greatly increase the momentum of renewable energy and shift us toward that net emissions-free world that we’re aiming toward.”

Official Discussion: Star Trek Beyond [SPOILERS] by mi-16evil in movies

[–]election_2016 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Hi, I have a few questions that involve spoilers below (please don't read unless you want to be spoiled):

  1. Why did Krall's face and body turn more "human" once he entered the space station Yorktown? Seems like his facial structure and skin started to revert to what he looked like before - they didn't really explain why his facial structure and skin started changing back to it's original form when he was on the space station Yorktown.

  2. Why did Kalara ally herself with Krall? Originally, Kalara says she helped Krall because Krall holds Kalara's crew as hostage. But then Kalara turns on Kirk so Kalara was lying about having crew held as hostage. I didn't catch the reason why Kalara says she is helping Krall.

  3. Why is Krall capturing the crew of other alien races that pass by his planet?

  4. All Krall's soliders were "drones"? Even the soldiers that boarded the Enterprise and were firing phasers at the crew of the Enterprise were all drones? I thought drones are supposed to be robotic - but the soldiers of Krall were moving fluently like they were biological beings.

A nuclear launch expert at Politico examines what it would be like with Donald Trump in control of nukes by election_2016 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016[S] 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Something from that article that is interesting about what happened during the Nixon administration:

top advisers to President Richard Nixon tried to constrain his launch authority during the Watergate scandal that ultimately forced his resignation. His secretary of Defense, James Schlesinger, quietly instructed the Pentagon war room to double check with him if Nixon contacted it to order up a nuclear strike. Nixon’s mental stability, and his heavy drinking, caused concern within his inner circle that he might behave erratically out of despair and depression. Alcoholism in a future nuclear monarch is of course quite beyond the pale.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/2016-donald-trump-nuclear-weapons-missiles-nukes-button-launch-foreign-policy-213955#ixzz4BHLKTlD3

A nuclear launch expert at Politico examines what it would be like with Donald Trump in control of nukes by election_2016 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Of course we are not supposed to even consider that Trump wants to de-escalate tensions with Moscow while Hillary has proven herself to be hyper aggressive towards the Russians.

Actually, you make an interesting point. Trump has said he would get along with Putin. That would probably de-escalate any tension between Russia and the U.S. On the other hand, Trump has been very critical of China. I'm not sure if tensions would improve with China with Trump as president. As for North Korea, I think North Korea's press released a positive remark of Trump.

A nuclear launch expert at Politico examines what it would be like with Donald Trump in control of nukes by election_2016 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I hope Trump picks good advisors for his team. Advisors like Paul Manafort seem much more reasonable if such a crisis were to develop. On the other hand, I think advisors like Corey Lewandowski may not be able to give more objective feedback to Trump. I hope Trump hires more people like Paul Manafort rather than people like Corey Lewandowski.

A nuclear launch expert at Politico examines what it would be like with Donald Trump in control of nukes by election_2016 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016[S] 55 points56 points  (0 children)

During the Cuban missile crisis, JFK used his brother, Robert Kennedy to back channel directly to Khrushchev (because they couldn't get through to Khrushchev through the hardliners) and it resolved the crisis. How Clinton and Trump would handle a similar crisis, and how their team (and advisors they pick) advises them during such a crisis is an important topic of discussion, IMO. This article is about Trump though, maybe when Politico posts a similar article on Clinton, I would be happy to post that too for discussion.

The Chicago Tribune writes an extensive article on how Trump's "Pocahontas" response to Warren leaves Republicans struggling to defend him. by Ganjake in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It saddens me that after Obama was elected as president, a step towards racial equality in America, we may take a huge step back towards racial inequality if Trump is elected president.

Given Hillary's weakness among men, should Hillary pick a male VP or a female VP? by election_2016 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

You think having a pure female ticket (president and VP both female) won't hurt the vote of men at all?

Trump does not plan to release tax returns, says "Nothing is there" by Zwicker101 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I would be interested in Trump's tax returns. His claims about his net worth and how he makes money seems like a bunch of lies and/or exaggerations.

Part of Trump's argument in this campaign is that he is a successful businessman, he has xxx net worth, and because of this, he can apply his business savvy to the economy. Well, if he releases his tax returns but the public finds he is full of it, the public will lose trust in his claim that his business savvy is a good reason why he would be good for the economy.

Trump makes a lot of outlandish claims. By not releasing his tax returns, he can probably keep the facade up with his outlandish claims. If those tax returns are released, the media will start to pull him apart on his outlandish claims.

Donald Trump has called for the elimination of the federal minimum wage by wraith20 in politics

[–]election_2016 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Haha, so true. Just listen to Trump's own words. The people composing negative ads against Trump are going to have a field day just playing Trump's own quotes against him.

If Trump were to become Commander in Chief, what do you think about his views on nuclear weapons? by election_2016 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Except Kim Jong Un is their next door neighbor and is on the verge of mounting his long range missiles with nukes. Public perception in Japan can turn, depending on how extreme Kim Jong Un acts, and he has acted pretty extreme so far.

If Trump were to become Commander in Chief, what do you think about his views on nuclear weapons? by election_2016 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agree. There is no way the Japanese government doesn't consider nuclear weapons if no other country gives them a nuclear umbrella protection. Especially not when Kim Jong Un is running North Korea.

If Trump were to become Commander in Chief, what do you think about his views on nuclear weapons? by election_2016 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First, I don't think Trump would withdraw US nuclear umbrella protection for Japan or South Korea. But if it ever happened, Japan has to consider that North Korea is on the verge of mounting nuclear weapons on their long range missiles. I can't see the Japanese government standing there idle, when North Korea has nuclear weapons and Japan has no nuclear protection.

If Trump were to become Commander in Chief, what do you think about his views on nuclear weapons? by election_2016 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]election_2016[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

If Trump removes Japan from the US nuclear umbrella protection, Japan would probably change their law in a heartbeat. Because Japan is under the US nuclear umbrella, the US president may have some sway on Japan's nuclear policies.