DrDisrespect Permanently Banned from Twitch

[Master Disaster]

8 minutes ago, nonamesm3 said:

If a book store is selling books doesn’t mean that everybody working there agrees with every book. I don’t thing owners of book stores read all their books to make sure they agree with them. 
 

Amazon selling something doesn’t mean that everybody working on Amazon has tried or read the product. Streaming in Twitch doesn’t mean that you has to agree with everything Amazon happens to sell. Working at Twitch doesn’t mean that you agree or need to agree with everything Amazon sells. 

Yep, ultimately it boils down to influence and exposure.

 

By selling a book Amazon are not influencing anybodies opinion, the people buying the book are the people who already believe in its content or have made a conscious choice to expose themselves to it.

 

By allowing somebody to openly advocate fake news Twitch are both exposing people to it that might not have been and allowing him to influence his audiences opinion on the subject.

 

The amount of times I've seen the "free speech" argument used in the wrong context makes me laugh. The government cannot stop you from thinking or saying anything you believe in to anybody who chooses to listen however no business is under any obligation to give anybody a platform to preach their own beliefs to others.

[Roswell]

9 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

You do realise there is historic precedence regarding silencing authors, right? It's something that has happened in the past and it didn't go down well then.

 

Quite frankly if you cannot differentiate between selling a book and allowing a person to openly advocate conspiracy theories live to an audience then that is your problem.

 

Right now this is generally considered to be the best theory as for the reasoning behind his ban. Also fun fact, having a theory about something and pushing a conspiracy theory are not the same thing, the latter has to have an unlawful or malicious intent.

Conspiracy theories don't need to be unlawful. They just need to have the elements of covertness, influence and outcome which is exactly what you're proposing. It's funny, but again sad that you're using a conspiracy theory to explain why he was banned for repeating conspiracy theories from a conspiracy theorist while you yourself, dislike conspiracy theories.

 

And no, any sane person that objectively looks at this situation can see that this is almost certainly a legal issue. Be it civil or criminal. Contract dispute/breach, #metoo, etc.

 

Amazon isn't secretly silencing streamers for talking about 5G, lol.

[Master Disaster]

53 minutes ago, Vitamanic said:

Conspiracy theories don't need to be unlawful. They just need to have the elements of covertness, influence and outcome which is exactly what you're proposing. It's funny, but again sad that you're using a conspiracy theory to explain why he was banned for repeating conspiracy theories from a conspiracy theorist while you yourself, dislike conspiracy theories.

 

And no, any sane person that objectively looks at this situation can see that this is almost certainly a legal issue. Be it civil or criminal. Contract dispute/breach, #metoo, etc.

 

Amazon isn't secretly silencing streamers for talking about 5G, lol.

Interesting you ignored half of my post entirely and only concentrated on the part the fit your counter. I said unlawful or malicious intent...

 

Twitch were in a contract with him, terminating that contract for any reason at all is automatically a legal issue.

 

For the last time, Twitch is not Amazon. Amazon is a store, not a social media platform. The 2 entities operate under very different rules.

 

Finally I'm not advocating anything. I'm passing on a theory that a lot of people (myself included) believe to be the most likely reason. Am I saying its true? Did I not clearly label it as a rumour?

 

Quite frankly the fact you believe Twitch would allow him to preach politics and nut job theories to his audience, especially right now with Coronavirus, #MeToo and #BLM all still being very actively talked about and both Twitter & Facebook both being in legal trouble over allowing fake news to exist on their platform says more about you than me.

 

Here's another theory. Ever thought that maybe Twitch have seen what is happening on YouTube, Twitter & Facebook right now and decided to jump out ahead of it before attention turns to their platform? Having one of their biggest partners telling people to go watch and read David Icke is not a good look for them. Icke is banned from Youtube, Twitter & Facebook and people who are telling others to watch him are also being suspended or banned.

 

Claiming they banned him for talking about 5G is so far short of the mark its bordering on incredulity. They banned him for preaching dangerous rhetoric to his audience. If what is being theorised is true then they gave him multiple warnings about it before they banned him.

 

Imagine I was to create a topic in GD and make the claim that 5G is causing Coronavirus. Do you not think the mods would instantly remove it and, at least give me a warning? Imagine I continued doing it and ignored the warning. The outcome would be a ban. Remember that LMG is not Twitch and I don't have 80,000 people watching all of my posts, even if they left that content in place its likely less than a few hundred people would ever read it yet they still would not want to host it on their platform. Now imagine what that situation would be like from Twitches POV with one of their biggest partners telling 80,000 people that he believes in this stuff and that they should go check it out for themselves.

[Taf the Ghost]

4 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Interesting you ignored half of my post entirely and only concentrated on the part the fit your counter. I said unlawful or malicious intent...

 

Twitch were in a contract with him, terminating that contract for any reason at all is automatically a legal issue.

 

For the last time, Twitch is not Amazon. Amazon is a store, not a social media platform. The 2 entities operate under very different rules.

 

Finally I'm not advocating anything. I'm passing on a theory that a lot of people (myself included) believe to be the most likely reason. Am I saying its true? Did I not clearly label it as a rumour?

 

Quite frankly the fact you believe Twitch would allow him to preach politics and nut job theories to his audience, especially right now with Coronavirus, #MeToo and #BLM all still being very actively talked about and both Twitter & Facebook both being in legal trouble over allowing fake news to exist on their platform says more about you than me.

 

Here's another theory. Ever thought that maybe Twitch have seen what is happening on YouTube, Twitter & Facebook right now and decided to jump out ahead of it before attention turns to their platform? Having one of their biggest partners telling people to go watch and read David Icke is not a good look for them. Icke is banned from Youtube, Twitter & Facebook and people who are telling others to watch him are also being suspended or banned.

 

Claiming they banned him for talking about 5G is so far short of the mark its bordering on incredulity. They banned him for preaching dangerous rhetoric to his audience. If what is being theorised is true then they gave him multiple warnings about it before they banned him.

 

Imagine I was to create a topic in GD and make the claim that 5G is causing Coronavirus. Do you not think the mods would instantly remove it and, at least give me a warning? Imagine I continued doing it and ignored the warning. The outcome would be a ban. Remember that LMG is not Twitch and I don't have 80,000 people watching all of my posts, even if they left that content in place its likely less than a few hundred people would ever read it yet they still would not want to host it on their platform. Now imagine what that situation would be like from Twitches POV with one of their biggest partners telling 80,000 people that he believes in this stuff and that they should go check it out for themselves.

Twitch's issue wouldn't be Icke, who's hilarious not dangerous, but something involving taxes, money movement or legal structures. Twitch isn't doing this from the top if there wasn't some "risk" exposure to their management team. The one thing agreed from all of the "sources" is Twitch Management told the ToS enforcement team to do this, which means this isn't really a ToS violation issue. This is top-level wrangling issues, not something they'd toss out a 2-week suspension & virtue signal about. 

 

Twitch's lack of "free PR points" is the biggest clue this is actually an issue that isn't common. And, something lost on too many, it is entirely possible this is really to shut up Dr. Disrespect for information *he* has that they don't want getting out, which, by locking up the situation in legal contract negotiation, will keep it hidden for a very long time. Twitch's real risk is their King Simp that manages the accounts for most of the e-girls. There's already information out there about it, but they've managed to keep it under the radar. Make a lot of sense if Dr. Disrespect's team, who are very good at the entire production side of running a business, just happens to be sitting on very damning information about people at Twitch. Or, maybe one of the harassed/assaulted women went to Dr. Disrespect for help, and he's now caught in the crossfire?

 

Or it could be about David Icke, at which point we then have to ask: wait, I thought the reptiles thing was a joke?

[Master Disaster]

5 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Twitch's issue wouldn't be Icke, who's hilarious not dangerous, but something involving taxes, money movement or legal structures. Twitch isn't doing this from the top if there wasn't some "risk" exposure to their management team. The one thing agreed from all of the "sources" is Twitch Management told the ToS enforcement team to do this, which means this isn't really a ToS violation issue. This is top-level wrangling issues, not something they'd toss out a 2-week suspension & virtue signal about. 

 

Twitch's lack of "free PR points" is the biggest clue this is actually an issue that isn't common. And, something lost on too many, it is entirely possible this is really to shut up Dr. Disrespect for information *he* has that they don't want getting out, which, by locking up the situation in legal contract negotiation, will keep it hidden for a very long time. Twitch's real risk is their King Simp that manages the accounts for most of the e-girls. There's already information out there about it, but they've managed to keep it under the radar. Make a lot of sense if Dr. Disrespect's team, who are very good at the entire production side of running a business, just happens to be sitting on very damning information about people at Twitch. Or, maybe one of the harassed/assaulted women went to Dr. Disrespect for help, and he's now caught in the crossfire?

 

Or it could be about David Icke, at which point we then have to ask: wait, I thought the reptiles thing was a joke?

At this point anything is possible and I'm hesitant to dismiss anything outright. Personally I believe its because he crossed the line and started to promote wild nonsense to his audience. I'm sure Twitch management don't want to end up next to Twitter & Facebook in court explaining why they allowed the spread of fake news on their platform.

 

Its OK saying Icke is funny but remember, funny and dangerous are not mutually exclusive terms. Its nut jobs like him that are responsible for tens of thousands of people believing the earth is flat, Icke himself is directly responsible for the myth that CV is caused by 5G. It might be funny to people intelligent enough to realise its nonsense but a lot of people actually believe it.

 

If the Doc does have information about people at Twitch I think the last thing they'd do is fire him and terminate his contract.

[lewdicrous]

Let's not forget that the person who broke the news in the first place supposedly knows the reason, but doesn't want to share it.

Honestly, I don't believe that dr disrespect doesn't know the reason behind it (if that's still his position).

I'm pretty sure that he knows, maybe not from twitch directly, instead from one of the "credible sources" or from simplord69 slasher.

[Taf the Ghost]

3 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

At this point anything is possible and I'm hesitant to dismiss anything outright. Personally I believe its because he crossed the line and started to promote wild nonsense to his audience. I'm sure Twitch management don't want to end up next to Twitter & Facebook in court explaining why they allowed the spread of fake news on their platform.

 

Its OK saying Icke is funny but remember, funny and dangerous are not mutually exclusive terms. Its nut jobs like him that are responsible for tens of thousands of people believing the earth is flat, Icke himself is directly responsible for the myth that CV is caused by 5G. It might be funny to people intelligent enough to realise its nonsense but a lot of people actually believe it.

 

If the Doc does have information about people at Twitch I think the last thing they'd do is fire him and terminate his contract.

A lot of people believe the mainstream news, and we know they're more wrong than anything Icke is up to. But Twitch also would have used this situation as a chance to purge that type of content & gotten free PR points for it. They didn't. They made a top-level decision that's going to result in settling a contract for at least 7 figures. There is something that has to have deep risk to the people involved at the top, not just the PR hit that could happen. It wouldn't just be a business relationship falling apart, as they'd have not signed a contract back in march for millions.

 

Now, it could be as simple as Twitch has re-run the numbers and Dr. Disrespect's contract (which is likely north of 5 million USD per year) is simply not worth it. Since they want to get out of it but it's otherwise locked in, they can just claim it's a ToS violation and end the contract. What that'll do is cause legal wrangling for a while, as Twitch will have a lot of leverage in the situation, to basically come to a settlement for some smaller % on the original amount. This is basically like a Pro Athlete holding out or a team cutting a player to resign them for cheaper. Once you're into contract this big, sometimes, it's not personal, it's just "business". 

[Rolling2405]

On 6/26/2020 at 2:49 PM, Rupe said:

why he is banned at this time

 

On 6/26/2020 at 3:02 PM, Syn. said:

he has a history of bad behavior but so do a lot of other streamers, I don't watch him often but unless he has done something awful

He has done something awful he has committed a sexual misconduct, (rape, sexual abuse etc). He and everyone else whI does something like that absolutely deserves to be punished!

[.Apex.]

8 minutes ago, Thomas001 said:

 

He has done something awful he has committed a sexual misconduct, (rape, sexual abuse etc). He and everyone else whI does something like that absolutely deserves to be punished!

You're speaking of it like it is a fact but it is unknown what happened at this time, don't spread baseless rumors

[Roswell]

On 7/2/2020 at 11:12 AM, Taf the Ghost said:

A lot of people believe the mainstream news, and we know they're more wrong than anything Icke is up to. But Twitch also would have used this situation as a chance to purge that type of content & gotten free PR points for it. They didn't. They made a top-level decision that's going to result in settling a contract for at least 7 figures. There is something that has to have deep risk to the people involved at the top, not just the PR hit that could happen. It wouldn't just be a business relationship falling apart, as they'd have not signed a contract back in march for millions.

 

Now, it could be as simple as Twitch has re-run the numbers and Dr. Disrespect's contract (which is likely north of 5 million USD per year) is simply not worth it. Since they want to get out of it but it's otherwise locked in, they can just claim it's a ToS violation and end the contract. What that'll do is cause legal wrangling for a while, as Twitch will have a lot of leverage in the situation, to basically come to a settlement for some smaller % on the original amount. This is basically like a Pro Athlete holding out or a team cutting a player to resign them for cheaper. Once you're into contract this big, sometimes, it's not personal, it's just "business". 

You're saying reputable mainstream news sources are less accurate than some random conspiracy theorist? 

 

It's scary that people think like this.

[gloop]

23 minutes ago, Thomas001 said:

He has done something awful he has committed a sexual misconduct, (rape, sexual abuse etc). He and everyone else whI does something like that absolutely deserves to be punished

Proof?

 

All that I know that he has done ‘sexually’ is cheating on his wife, which he admitted live on stream and him and his wife have managed that personally. 

[Taf the Ghost]

2 hours ago, Vitamanic said:

You're saying reputable mainstream news sources are less accurate than some random conspiracy theorist? 

 

It's scary that people think like this.

Quote

“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.

In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.

That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I'd point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn't. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.”

― Michael Crichton

 

Mainstream Media is viewed as "acceptable". It's anything but accurate. This is done for reasons of Narrative Framing. Read up.

[Derkoli]

On 6/27/2020 at 4:49 PM, Master Disaster said:

I'm actually wondering if I can pull the last 20 seconds of Audio from that Video and run it through Virtual DJs 12 Channel EQ VST. I mean its not like I could isolate the voices or anything (thats not possible without serious equipment) but I could remove most of the low end noise and some of the mid to try and boost the voices.....

There is 100% "Thats enough hands up" with no pause quietly in the background before he says "Oh F*ck" and turns his head suddenly. The "Thats enough hands up" starts just before the girl saying "teeheehee"

 

The video has terrible noise floor so it's hard to make out, but it's defo there.

 

The "Thats enough hands up" also starts just after some quiet speech after "You better not taunt me"

 

The phrase 100% is there with no pauses, said in roughly 1 second.

 

 

Starts at this point.

 

Then again, it might be placebo as I'm listening for a phrase similar to it.

 

Man, fuck psycho-acoustics.

[Roswell]

2 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

 

Mainstream Media is viewed as "acceptable". It's anything but accurate. This is done for reasons of Narrative Framing. Read up.

Yeah, you realize that you're quoting a made-up term from a science fiction book, right? 

 

Sorry, I'll continue on trusting journalists and science over a dude that thinks 5G cell towers are controlling our minds and giving us covid-19, lol.

[Taf the Ghost]

11 minutes ago, Vitamanic said:

Yeah, you realize that you're quoting a made-up term from a science fiction book, right? 

 

Sorry, I'll continue on trusting journalists and science over a dude that thinks 5G cell towers are controlling our minds and giving us covid-19, lol.

"A lot of people believe the mainstream news, and we know they're more wrong than anything Icke is up to." I appreciate you proving my point, but you really should look up how Narrative Framing works. There's a reason "Fake News" stuck so dang hard.

[Roswell]

6 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

"A lot of people believe the mainstream news, and we know they're more wrong than anything Icke is up to." I appreciate you proving my point, but you really should look up how Narrative Framing works. There's a reason "Fake News" stuck so dang hard.

I'm not proving any of your points. If you genuinely think you'll see more misinformation flicking on BBC News or whatever than you will from a David Icke conspiracy theory book, you're out of your element.

 

It's sad and unfortunate that you're bringing up "fake news" in such an ironic way. Conspiracy theorists thrive on the weak minded, don't be one of them. 

 

Edit: Also, narrative framing is a literary technique in fiction... Not exactly sure why you keep bringing up stuff from the world of fictional literature to argue about current events. This is the second time now.

[Master Disaster]

2 hours ago, Vitamanic said:

I'm not proving any of your points. If you genuinely think you'll see more misinformation flicking on BBC News or whatever than you will from a David Icke conspiracy theory book, you're out of your element.

 

It's sad and unfortunate that you're bringing up "fake news" in such an ironic way. Conspiracy theorists thrive on the weak minded, don't be one of them. 

 

Edit: Also, narrative framing is a literary technique in fiction... Not exactly sure why you keep bringing up stuff from the world of fictional literature to argue about current events. This is the second time now.

I believe the implication is that the news is fictional? Also you're not wrong when you say its a technique used in fiction however this doesn't exclude it from being transferred to the real world, AFAIK all it means is to tell a story within another story.

 

2 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

"A lot of people believe the mainstream news, and we know they're more wrong than anything Icke is up to." I appreciate you proving my point, but you really should look up how Narrative Framing works. There's a reason "Fake News" stuck so dang hard.

Disagree. Theres a HUGE difference between an agenda and making up lies then spreading them as factual in order to prey on the weak and vulnerable.

 

What mainstream media do is agenda based, they have their own motives and narrative and try to spin real topics to suit that narrative. They're not lying (since the events they report on do actually happen), they're twisting the truth just a little, usually by blame shifting.

 

Icke is a flat out liar, a fantasist and his nonsense is actually harmful to people.

 

Not saying either is particularly good but one is much worse than the other.

[NeuesTestament]

12 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

What mainstream media do is agenda based, they have their own motives and narrative and try to spin real topics to suit that narrative. They're not lying (since the events they report on do actually happen), they're twisting the truth just a little.

I disagree. They lie, albeit often by ommission. A couple of years back they published a quote by a sister of a black man who died in a confrontation with law enforcement, they just had her saying something to the effect of "don't break shit". In reality she said "don't break our shit, break theirs [referring to the suburbs]. That's not just pushing an agenda, that to me is a straight misrepresentation of reality. Or I guess you could say, a lie.

 

There are more examples like that. It might not be as obvious as your average conspiracy theorist or flat earther. But these are still essentially lies and not just pushing an agenda.

[Master Disaster]

12 minutes ago, NeuesTestament said:

I disagree. They lie, albeit often by ommission. A couple of years back they published a quote by a sister of a black man who died in a confrontation with law enforcement, they just had her saying something to the effect of "don't break shit". In reality she said "don't break our shit, break theirs [referring to the suburbs]. That's not just pushing an agenda, that to me is a straight misrepresentation of reality. Or I guess you could say, a lie.

 

There are more examples like that. It might not be as obvious as your average conspiracy theorist or flat earther. But these are still essentially lies and not just pushing an agenda.

In the realm of agenda politics misrepresentation is part of operational procedures 101.

 

I suppose I cannot retort because I don't disagree with your statement. One important distinction I would make though, having an agenda and lying are not necessarily mutually exclusive. People sometimes lie by omission (or by commission too) in order to further an agenda.

 

I suppose it would be more accurate to say they don't lie about events taking place, they do lie about the specifics of the event though.

[Rolling2405]

8 hours ago, Syn. said:

You're speaking of it like it is a fact but it is unknown what happened at this time, don't spread baseless rumors

 

8 hours ago, gloop said:

Proof?

 

All that I know that he has done ‘sexually’ is cheating on his wife, which he admitted live on stream and him and his wife have managed that personally. 

No proof just basing it off the fact that it happened so close to other Twitch streamers getting banned for sexual misconduct 
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pcgamer.com/amp/twitch-is-banning-streamers-for-sexual-misconduct-and-abuse/ 
 

Just putting two and two together and making a guess

 

[Master Disaster]

Just now, Thomas001 said:

 

No proof just basing it off the fact that it happened so close to other Twitch streamers getting banned for sexual misconduct 
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pcgamer.com/amp/twitch-is-banning-streamers-for-sexual-misconduct-and-abuse/ 
 

Just putting two and two together 

 

Correlation does not equal causation. 2 things happening close together doesn't make them, in any way, linked.

[Roswell]

1 hour ago, Master Disaster said:

I believe the implication is that the news is fictional? Also you're not wrong when you say its a technique used in fiction however this doesn't exclude it from being transferred to the real world, AFAIK all it means is to tell a story within another story.

I pointed it out because it made no sense in the context he was using it in. "Fake news" is just flat out falsehood, there's typically no attempt to implant additional narratives in their misinformation. It's just garbage on social media designed for clicks.

 

I get it that there are definitely liberal and conservative news outlets that focus on certain topics more than others and have vocal editorial/opinion content. It's just a byproduct of a free press. That said though, there are a plethora of neutral sources available as well. NPR, BBC (not sure about their UK domestic bias), AP, Reuters, etc. Him stating that it's all fake is absurd to me.

[Master Disaster]

34 minutes ago, Vitamanic said:

I pointed it out because it made no sense in the context he was using it in. "Fake news" is just flat out falsehood, there's typically no attempt to implant additional narratives in their misinformation. It's just garbage on social media designed for clicks.

 

I get it that there are definitely liberal and conservative news outlets that focus on certain topics more than others and have vocal editorial/opinion content. It's just a byproduct of a free press. That said though, there are a plethora of neutral sources available as well. NPR, BBC (not sure about their UK domestic bias), AP, Reuters, etc. Him stating that it's all fake is absurd to me.

100% agreed. On the point about the BBC, they're a publicly owned entity and as such are legally bound to operate under a very strict charter. The BBC are not even allowed to report on a topic unless they have evidence from an independent source that the facts of the story are accurate, is there's any evidence that things might not add up they will simply not report it and there's ramifications for them if they get caught reporting inaccuracies. They are answerable to the population of the UK since we pay for them to exist.

 

Edit - That applies to agendas too, state, private or otherwise. This is the very reason why when we have a general election in the UK all political messages are broadcast on the BBC. They're legally obligated to be impartial.

[Theminecraftaddict555]

14 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

 

Mainstream Media is viewed as "acceptable". It's anything but accurate. This is done for reasons of Narrative Framing. Read up.

I'd say Mainstream media is more accurate than conspiracy theories but at the same time though they should be looked at with an open mind. 

[gloop]

New tweet from Dr.Disrespect.