Twitch already has a flagging system for "mature" content, and they ban anything with actual nudity pretty aggressively. It sounds like this is actually a call to police the use of sex appeal by streamers, which seems like a difficult thing to judge in general and I'm not sure how they could actually achieve such a thing.
Yeah it gets into the hyper subjective realm of what is acceptable or not. If I sexually identify as a CAS aircraft, will they ban DCS A-10 Simulator as sexual content?
On the other hand, they're a company so they're perfectly allowed to decide where they draw the line and enforce that.
I just hope we don't accidentally cause a regression with women in gaming by accidentally enforcing a dress code that mostly impacts women.
> If I sexually identify as a CAS aircraft, will they ban DCS A-10 Simulator as sexual content?
I don’t know if this is a joke, but that is a thing that happens.
Given how long I was blind to my own (relatively straightforward) bisexuality, I think the real answer is that people in charge literally cannot conceive of sexuality that far away from their worldview.
Stop this bullshit. God created male or female.the more you understand this the better.so now that you think you are both male and female,are you going to fuck yourself and have kids?
That's a pretty classic example really. I know Flickr had some awkward interactions with a foot fetishist community that took up residence there, because they didn't reeeally post anything that violated the terms of service, they were just kind of creepy about it.
Yeah, this is just what angry nerds on reddit have been pushing for a while because they’re upset that pretty women are earning a decent living by playing games online.
Yeah I don't really understand who is complaining. You have to go pretty out of your way to find these "sexual streamers" and they have pretty low viewer count to be honest.
If you stick to browsing Twitch by game you almost never see them, and the top game streams have 10k-20k viewers at all times. You have to specifically go to the IRL section of Twitch to find camgirl style streams, and most of these "sexual streamers" have under 1k viewers. It's hardly a mainstream part of Twitch, and is something you have to specifically hunt down.
Well sure sex is a great way to sell products, but for Twitch it will be terrible. They are selling a brand and a platform. That's all they have, because the tech is not too hard to replicate. That, and existing users, which I'll get to now.
Twitch already has a reputation with gamers/streamers of becoming something close to a camsite slowly(while it seems hyperbolic, sentiments of most of people there usually are too), contrary to what it was meant to be - a purely game streaming centered site. Apart from infuriating other usual steamers on the site who will lose viewers to the 'sexual content' steamers (and will result in general discontentment). These streamers will most likely leave to YouTube Gaming or something else. If that doesn't happen, there are long term ramifications to consider.
Say Twitch accepts that section of streamers and continues with MATURE AUDIENCE ONLY labels etc. Now obviously those videos won't be monetized so they are more of an expense now. Then, if they become a significant part of the website, they'll get questions from upper management. Despite silicon valley considering itself 'progressive', none of them will be okay with this (see patreon).
Then comes the next step: Gaming competitions and other engagements. If a gaming competition accepts Twitch as a sponsor, people will see it as if the events agree with that part of Twitch, which is a no-no because those events have kids' parents to consider (remember, you still can't swear in most similar events and hosts get fined if they do).
While this may seem like a weak argument, a weak enough link to sex industry is enough for investors to pull out. That's because they fear the occasional articles from The Daily Beast and The New Yorker about the effects of Twitch on teenagers' sexuality and the world in general. Now say one of those lead to someone from the NYT or Bloomberg looking for a story, you've got investors making calls who read a lengthy piece about how Twitch is preying on adolescent kids.
Do you think this is too outlandish? Look at YouTube's 'weird videos aimed at kids' problem and how many people it is hiring and time it is investing to solve that problem. Twitch is more at risk since it is a newer brand still at the 'first impression' stage for many. And boy you don't want to get that wrong.
Ask parents if they are okay with letting their kids have (paid!) membership on Twich after that news gets out. Parents are a huge effect on revenue of services their kids use.
Out of your way, you say? Check out the irl section,please. More often than not you’ll find a female streaming with her tits out in top10. Quite often there’s 2 or 3 in top 10. The content they provide is just sitting around and look in the camera waiting for donations and having their breasts up in the camera.
Personally, I don’t care. But it’s not like those type of streamers are hard to find.
That's my point though. These sex appeal focused streams are almost all in the IRL section, not the top games section. You have to specifically go to the IRL section to find them, aka you have to go out of your way to get there.
Compare the game focused sections like PUBG, or League of Legends, or World of Warcraft. These sections of the site are clearly the dominant and original viewing categories on Twitch from the beginning. If you just want to watch a game then you can go to these sections and do that.
On the other hand if you want to watch for the streamer then the IRL section is there to cater to whatever type of streamer you want to watch, including streamers who have followers based on sex appeal, not game finesse.
It feels like manufactured outrage to me if you are going to the IRL section and complaining about the contents. Because the IRL section isn't game focused in the first place. It is personality focused, and sexual appeal is going to be part of it. You also have streams of buff shirtless guys working out in the gym on IRL, just like you have streams of women in tight clothing. If you go the IRL section and start complaining about it not being game focused that's just silly.
> It is personality focused, and sexual appeal is going to be part of it.
Well, exactly that is debateable. Sexual appeal is often coupled with a completely flat or acted personality. And if they have somewhat of a personality, then usually the stream is constantly interrupted by them reading out donations or whatnot.
And this discussion is not just about the rest of Twitch. Some people would actually like to use the IRL section to find streamers whose personality they like. Having the top-viewed streams there being focused on sexual appeal generally makes it harder to find actual personality streamers. It also means that actual personality streamers often avoid IRL.
But then they don't avoid it completely either. Some artists now stream in IRL instead of Creative. The section Music has been pretty much dead since the introduction of IRL, because people making music now pretty much either choose between Creative or IRL, leaving Music for completely personality-devoid streams of pre-recorded music.
> If you stick to browsing Twitch by game you almost never see them
I don't have a strong opinion of what should or shouldn't be allowed, but that statement is false.
For example, if you browse League of Legends in the evening, very often a couple of the top 24 thumbnails are girl streamers in sexy outfits who are not really focused on playing, and do provocative things when people sub / donate.
Sure it's not that sex appeal focused streamers are never in the game categories but it is much rarer than it used to be. The IRL category has helped by moving the majority of all these streamers to one place where you can go watch them if that's your thing.
All that is needed is for Twitch mods to be a bit more active in retagging such streams to IRL instead of the game category. In general I think that they are doing a great job. You used to see a lot more League of Legends streams where a female host dressed in a revealing outfit had her cam much larger than the gameplay and it was clearly more focused on sex appeal than gameplay, but that type of stream is now mostly cordoned off in IRL.
A simple rule like "streamer camera can only take up X% of the screen, and gameplay must take up at least Y% of the screen" otherwise it gets retagged as an IRL stream solves the issue.
Devil's advocate: a small portion of streamers use their sexuality to solicit large donations from individuals who cannot afford such donations. Sure you can't police it, but it kind of underpins the site when every popular game has multiple people using this strategy for personal profit. It's highly visible, everybody knows about it. Shouldn't it at least be talked about?
To Devil's Advocate the Devil's Advocate: This isn't a "sexualized streaming" issue, this is an issue of people donating money they don't have or can't afford. Outside of a personally invasive police state, I don't see a way of stopping this beyond some sort of flags for people who donate too much, similar to how gambling addiction is dealt with.
solicit large donations from individuals who cannot afford such donations
How is a donor's financial wellbeing the solicitor's problem? Sexy cam streams may be a total waste of money but at least it's not going to give you cancer as well as a short-term thrill.
> solicit large donations from individuals who cannot afford such donations.
This makes no sense. Either Dad should take back the credit card or adults can make their own decisions. Either way, I can’t see how that would have anything to do with the person streaming the video asking for cash!
I mean, argue that cute girls have it easy getting cash for titilating their viewers. Argue that Twitch isn’t for tits. But arguing that boobs made someone spend money they couldn’t afford is just debasing to men everywhere.
People don't exist in such clean categories, there is a spectrum on which everyone lies w.r.t. their abilities of self awareness and self control and their knowledge of their present and future situations, and therefore their ability to act within their own best interests. Communities which seek to maximize future outcomes for their members necessarily seek to aid them by limiting harmful actions.
Where the lines are drawn, how the limits are enacted, and whether or not something is harmful is of course a matter of opinion.
Trying to protect someone against their own urges to give someone money over the internet in return for nothing... I mean how suggestible would you have to be? Society and community is not meant to act in loco parentis, unless you have an IQ ~60.
This is not any kind of fraud, or bait and switch. This is, I show you an image and ask you to send me money. No, the world I want to live in presumes a level of self discipline and self responsibility, and offers a freedom of speech which I think is antithetical to the level of thought-police that your idea of community policing would require.
>and they ban anything with actual nudity pretty aggressively.
Framing it as if they only ban aggressively for actual nudity is unfair. They ban aggressively on all kinds of fronts, including very subjective criteria, they just do it very inconsistently.
For all I care, they can do whatever they want. But I do feel like they are hard to take seriously until they decide to apply their rules equally. They do not. They have egregiously played favorites in a way that is surprising for such a big and respected entity as Twitch.
The thing that sucks is, the irresponsible ways that Twitch and YouTube behave hurts everyone, because they try to sell ads on content they know advertisers wouldn't like, and when advertisers wise up they overreact and become adverse to supporting small content creators. They would rather have "safe," big content creators instead, where they can feel like they're getting their money's worth.
> But I do feel like they are hard to take seriously until they decide to apply their rules equally. They do not.
Any examples that can help me understand?
Perhaps the advertising angle goes hand in hand with the above inequality. Ads are essentially buying real-estate in your brain. One way is to have exclusives (i.e., buying out the room), another is Yelp-style (pay-to-play).
If you've got the time, the above two videos are a great rundown of the current 'sexual streaming' situation on twitch by one of the first ever professional streamers. He can be a bit edgy at times, and there's swearing in the video if that's not your thing, but he has a solid, well thought-out opinion when it comes to most things. The whole situation is a mess, with crazy misogynist incel types on one side and Twitch on the other just sort of ignoring complaints and being complicit in the mass harassment of some of the women on their platform.
If you want some examples of their inconsistent application of the rules, you could check out many of the things LegendaryLea was given short temporary bans for, then compare it to e.g. the stream IamSSunny was permanently banned for, which was later arbitrarily reduced to a temporary ban - driving home just how inconsistent they are with their own rules.
Mildly NSFW though, so I won't post any direct examples here.
It is impossible to consistently apply a policy as subjective as sexual/mature content. Way bigger platforms than them have tried and routinely fail at it. You can keep trying to define what is or isn't acceptable, and people will keep coming up with more ambiguous content. The best anyone can do in this situation is look at user reports and make a judgement call.
Watching the world drift further and further towards moral prudery is so disheartening, especially when so much social progress was made on this front during the 60s and 70s. Society is so cyclical :/
I actually don't associate this with liberalism. To me this seems an extension of the "real gamers" phenomenon, where certain gamers think that gaming and streaming should correspond to some good-at-the-game, purely-about-the-game ideal, which the sex appeal streams clearly do not fall into.
I'm not sure where you got the ideal that moral prudery is involved here, but it has nothing to do with that. The people who want "twitch girls" off the site do not have any objections to cam girls. The problem is that they're hijacking a service that was built for and by a specific community.
Twitch has a large number of sex workers who are just using it as a conduit to find "customers" and are not contributing to the community, but detracting from it. There are other sites dedicated to that.
This is especially problematic for female streamers who are community members and get constantly harassed with "tits or gtfo" or worse. They struggle to be taken seriously as gamers due to the cheap antics and "accidental wardrobe malfunctions" employed by the other women on the site, and are punished for it in terms of number of viewers.
My age group (and younger) seems to be trending towards a more conservative-yet-inclusive set of morals. This new stink about camgirl streamers is just one facet of something wider and more encompassing. Or maybe I'm just pissed that people are growing up and favoring more family-friendly stuff.
No, again, it has nothing to do with morals. There are many sites for sex workers, and rest assured that many in the twitch community who would prefer that they not hijack twitch also visit those other sites.
It's sequestered off into "IRL" which is buried amongst other titles of games. Earlier today, among the dozens of front-page feeds of people doing random things there were maybe three, now I see one (and its one of the same people as before). So unless the demographics of streamers have shifted in the past couple of days since this popped up on reddit, it's hard to consider it a takeover?
Reiterating OP, the momentum of this thing looks more like -- whatever it was before -- it is becoming or has become an generalized attack on sex appeal in a realm where AO/R/18+-rated content is still frequently a kiss-of-death, if not something needlessly danced around. I get that some gamers may not want this kind of thing but, c'mon, let people be people. If it's really bothersome then leave the site and maybe management will make a change after enough follow suit. It's already buried in a ghetto of other banners under "Browse" and I didn't see and there doesn't seem to be any other way to get to it besides search.
Also the twitch community should really evaluate it's complaints about outsiders given that it exists in the husk of justin.tv's corpse.
You mean how they hand out 24 hour bans to women for "accidentaly" showing genitals, meanwhile other streamers are getting permanently banned left and right for much smaller infractions?
I think the idea is people who don't have the same sex appeal feel they are finding it hard to compete. Also, they feel it is "changing" the feel of the site.
Not saying I agree, that's what it sounds like to me.
This was part of Twitch from the very beginning. The idea that it's "new" is really just ignorant people finding out after the fact and then complaining about it as if it wasn't always there.
It's easy to be salty when you're an unappreciated streamer and there's girls out there having an easier time with less effort. However, they're even not competing for the same audience. As to the second thing, it's a valid point, but there are solutions that don't resort to removing streams.
You have broadened the category widely enough to include both audiences. Given that guys typically watch gaming streams and undressed females for different reasons, I think there's finer distinctions in terms of which the audiences don't overlap.
Here's a thought experiment, imagine you are a young male looking for random streams because you're bored. You see a) one stream with speed runs done by a female streamer who is not scantily clad but actually has a lot of skill and is trying to garner views by being a good gamer. Then, there is a b) 23 year old female streamer who isn't really playing games but is merely doing stretches in yoga tights. What will you probably click first?
When talking about aggregate, the small delta counts. This swings those uncommitted to looking for sexual content as well as attracting those purely looking for sexual content. To be fair, there are more hardcore sexual content out there that is just as free, so why would the population just looking for soft porn go to Twitch to do it?
It sounds more to me like they are competing more than just having different audiences.
EDIT: and more importantly, these sexual streamer are taking advantage of it, while avoiding other sites devoted to sexual content where competition would be harder for them.
Wasn't there a thread on here a while back about a lady who was doing tech/nerdy 3D printing and maker videos, taking tons of criticism simply because she happened to be good looking while doing them? This seems like an oddly similar mind-set: You can't do game videos because you're sexy. What??
No, not because she "happened to be good looking", because she does many videos half naked. You cannot even link to her Twitter or Youtube without a [NSFW] tag. Why do you feel the need to use such a disingenuous framing?
The Twitch streamers in question are also creating what amounts to softcore pornography. They aren't making game videos, they are just using Twitch as an alternative to other adult camsites. That's the whole problem.
Yesterday someone linked me such a stream and it was just a pretty girl with a deep cut shirt.
Didn't look like porn to me and she wasn't really entertaining. It's more like the people want to satisfy their fantasies and buy the attention of a pretty girl. Clearly in a non sexual way otherwise they would turn to cam girl sites.
Is this bad? I don't know but I don't have a problem with it. I feel like it's sad that people feel like they have to buy the attention of another person. But this happens with male streamers too.
I watched a guy in the IRL section since I wanted to see what the guys stream and he was letting people insult him for money. It was really strange to watch.
I don't understand alot on twitch. But I don't see the pornography on it either.
Okay, so you didn't see one of the streams I'm talking about. Try one of the streams that promises to do "squats" or some other sexually suggestive activity whenever someone donates.
That would be fine, but there problem is the rules are not universally ignored, only for these types of streamers. Lots of guys with a small webcam view of them with no shirt on have been banned for sexual content. Either apply the rules when it makes sense, or not at all.
It's interesting to see the timing on when mainstream media runs these things. BBC is picking this up when most of the intensity around the topic was piping up on Reddit over the last couple of months. I just find the lag between when something hits the BBC vs the people directly involved with it fascinating.
The devolution of stream content on Twitch is really is something that needs to be addressed though. Anyone that thinks that Twitch isn't turning in to a soft-core cam girls site can just load the IRL section of Twitch and see for themselves. It takes about a 30 second cursory glance to see the themes.
UK news probably doesn’t provide much insight by way of timing; 98% is Brexit related now, even reader reviews of books published ten years ago — the rest is blessed relief that is often rapidly overcome with more Brexit.
> Anyone that thinks that Twitch isn't turning in to a soft-core cam girls site can just load the IRL section of Twitch and see for themselves.
And it's not even like anybody is trying to hide it, the Patreon's of many of these Streamers involve rewards like "Private lewd pictures" and their "gaming" often boils down to a video of a game being played in a small corner of the screen or simply playing rhythm/dance games.
Some of these Streamers advertise the fact they work as strippers/dancers in some place, it's a really weird combination of gaming and cam-girl culture. Imho it's kinda exploitive considering how it combines two of the things young males in puberty just love to do and plays on them very heavily.
I dont see what's exploitive on young males there. Older generations have had Playboys from the gas station and dad's VHS collection (or if they knew someone, their own), my generation had emule, Us porn sites and prepaid CCs, the new generation has patreon and camgirls.
They try to emotionally manipulate their viewers into donating to them. Or they try to form a real bond. There’s some clear mix of genuine value for the lonely donators and id assume emotional abuse on the part of the streamers.
I had to laugh if showing some cleavage, saying thank you or talking to you is emotional manipulation or even abuse.
Maybe there is really some truth to the lonely nerd.
It's probably just people stuck in their teens or teenagers. It's exactly like the teenage girls loving some star they never met and thinking they'll get married and all.
The more I read and think about it the more I'm asking myself how there can such an outrage about it.
Taking advantage of an emotionally vulnerable person, or as you put it "showing some cleavage, saying thank you or talking to you" is abusive. Just because you trivialize it (which you should feel ashamed for doing, very harmful attitude) doesn't mean its not abusive or wrong.
> It's exactly like the teenage girls loving some star they never met and thinking they'll get married and all.
The difference here being that this star acknowledges you existing as soon as you "donate" 5$, the more money you donate the more acknowledged you supposedly become, there is a direct feedback channel here that didn't exist like that before.
It also ties heavily into the whole "attention economy" concept and I'm also very certain it's not a healthy lifestyle for the Streamers themselves, reminds me very much about that whole situation of the commoditization of interpersonal relationships that's been happening in Japan with Hostess clubs [0].
You may think this is funny, that some people are willing to pay for casual social interactions, but only because you've been lucky enough to have a functional family/friend network to fulfill those particular needs for you. Yet, not everybody is lucky like that, quite many people feel very lonely most of the time (as they are pretty much alone) but that it's not a healthy way of living for humans so they are looking for ways to cope.
The real sad thing is that this is very likely one of the main motivations for streamers and donators alike; The feeling to belong, the be acknowledged.
Interesting, I watch a lot of IRL, in fact I got back into twitch because of it. I follow sketch artists, someone who live streams their travels around the world, a DJ doing live shows, a talented body painter that does super-hero shorts, etc.
Maybe I'm just really good now at the mental filtering of Internet, but it wasn't hard for me to find the interesting content.
That said, I can understand that it could over time degenerate, and Twitch will need to keep up quality. I think for Twitch, quality is more important then quantity. So I'm okay with some hand curation from them.
So I think Twitch actually will ban 'booby streamers' but I don't expect them to do it yet. The problem is that the community Twitch has built wants Twitch to be about games with little bits of other stuff but twitch wants to be a general service streaming site that just happened to start out with games. Sexualized streaming is a great way to branch out into non-game related livestreaming but also hurts the reputation of the site so I think allowing these streams is probably a temporary measure to build up the IRL streaming.
The problem is, there's a contingent of people on Twitch that will call any woman who's not completely flat chested or not all covered up a "booby streamer".
they should just relaunch justin.tv and move the IRL section to there. The big problem that the gamer streamers have is the IRL streamers are flooding twitch with users that are not the gaming streamers audience
If this is such a problem, then clearly there is a demand for it. Perhaps create a channel just for sexual streaming. The only question is, what to call it?
88 comments
[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 86.8 ms ] threadOn the other hand, they're a company so they're perfectly allowed to decide where they draw the line and enforce that.
I just hope we don't accidentally cause a regression with women in gaming by accidentally enforcing a dress code that mostly impacts women.
I don’t know if this is a joke, but that is a thing that happens.
Given how long I was blind to my own (relatively straightforward) bisexuality, I think the real answer is that people in charge literally cannot conceive of sexuality that far away from their worldview.
See the recent Naomi Wu controversy.
If you stick to browsing Twitch by game you almost never see them, and the top game streams have 10k-20k viewers at all times. You have to specifically go to the IRL section of Twitch to find camgirl style streams, and most of these "sexual streamers" have under 1k viewers. It's hardly a mainstream part of Twitch, and is something you have to specifically hunt down.
Of course, there's the other image problem with gaming competitions etc. who will hesitate a bit if Twitch was conducive to this behavior.
With less snark, advertising as an industry is famous for “sex sells”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_in_advertising
Twitch already has a reputation with gamers/streamers of becoming something close to a camsite slowly(while it seems hyperbolic, sentiments of most of people there usually are too), contrary to what it was meant to be - a purely game streaming centered site. Apart from infuriating other usual steamers on the site who will lose viewers to the 'sexual content' steamers (and will result in general discontentment). These streamers will most likely leave to YouTube Gaming or something else. If that doesn't happen, there are long term ramifications to consider.
Say Twitch accepts that section of streamers and continues with MATURE AUDIENCE ONLY labels etc. Now obviously those videos won't be monetized so they are more of an expense now. Then, if they become a significant part of the website, they'll get questions from upper management. Despite silicon valley considering itself 'progressive', none of them will be okay with this (see patreon).
Then comes the next step: Gaming competitions and other engagements. If a gaming competition accepts Twitch as a sponsor, people will see it as if the events agree with that part of Twitch, which is a no-no because those events have kids' parents to consider (remember, you still can't swear in most similar events and hosts get fined if they do).
While this may seem like a weak argument, a weak enough link to sex industry is enough for investors to pull out. That's because they fear the occasional articles from The Daily Beast and The New Yorker about the effects of Twitch on teenagers' sexuality and the world in general. Now say one of those lead to someone from the NYT or Bloomberg looking for a story, you've got investors making calls who read a lengthy piece about how Twitch is preying on adolescent kids.
Do you think this is too outlandish? Look at YouTube's 'weird videos aimed at kids' problem and how many people it is hiring and time it is investing to solve that problem. Twitch is more at risk since it is a newer brand still at the 'first impression' stage for many. And boy you don't want to get that wrong.
Ask parents if they are okay with letting their kids have (paid!) membership on Twich after that news gets out. Parents are a huge effect on revenue of services their kids use.
Compare the game focused sections like PUBG, or League of Legends, or World of Warcraft. These sections of the site are clearly the dominant and original viewing categories on Twitch from the beginning. If you just want to watch a game then you can go to these sections and do that.
On the other hand if you want to watch for the streamer then the IRL section is there to cater to whatever type of streamer you want to watch, including streamers who have followers based on sex appeal, not game finesse.
It feels like manufactured outrage to me if you are going to the IRL section and complaining about the contents. Because the IRL section isn't game focused in the first place. It is personality focused, and sexual appeal is going to be part of it. You also have streams of buff shirtless guys working out in the gym on IRL, just like you have streams of women in tight clothing. If you go the IRL section and start complaining about it not being game focused that's just silly.
Well, exactly that is debateable. Sexual appeal is often coupled with a completely flat or acted personality. And if they have somewhat of a personality, then usually the stream is constantly interrupted by them reading out donations or whatnot.
And this discussion is not just about the rest of Twitch. Some people would actually like to use the IRL section to find streamers whose personality they like. Having the top-viewed streams there being focused on sexual appeal generally makes it harder to find actual personality streamers. It also means that actual personality streamers often avoid IRL.
But then they don't avoid it completely either. Some artists now stream in IRL instead of Creative. The section Music has been pretty much dead since the introduction of IRL, because people making music now pretty much either choose between Creative or IRL, leaving Music for completely personality-devoid streams of pre-recorded music.
I don't have a strong opinion of what should or shouldn't be allowed, but that statement is false.
For example, if you browse League of Legends in the evening, very often a couple of the top 24 thumbnails are girl streamers in sexy outfits who are not really focused on playing, and do provocative things when people sub / donate.
All that is needed is for Twitch mods to be a bit more active in retagging such streams to IRL instead of the game category. In general I think that they are doing a great job. You used to see a lot more League of Legends streams where a female host dressed in a revealing outfit had her cam much larger than the gameplay and it was clearly more focused on sex appeal than gameplay, but that type of stream is now mostly cordoned off in IRL.
A simple rule like "streamer camera can only take up X% of the screen, and gameplay must take up at least Y% of the screen" otherwise it gets retagged as an IRL stream solves the issue.
How is a donor's financial wellbeing the solicitor's problem? Sexy cam streams may be a total waste of money but at least it's not going to give you cancer as well as a short-term thrill.
This makes no sense. Either Dad should take back the credit card or adults can make their own decisions. Either way, I can’t see how that would have anything to do with the person streaming the video asking for cash!
I mean, argue that cute girls have it easy getting cash for titilating their viewers. Argue that Twitch isn’t for tits. But arguing that boobs made someone spend money they couldn’t afford is just debasing to men everywhere.
Where the lines are drawn, how the limits are enacted, and whether or not something is harmful is of course a matter of opinion.
This is not any kind of fraud, or bait and switch. This is, I show you an image and ask you to send me money. No, the world I want to live in presumes a level of self discipline and self responsibility, and offers a freedom of speech which I think is antithetical to the level of thought-police that your idea of community policing would require.
Framing it as if they only ban aggressively for actual nudity is unfair. They ban aggressively on all kinds of fronts, including very subjective criteria, they just do it very inconsistently.
For all I care, they can do whatever they want. But I do feel like they are hard to take seriously until they decide to apply their rules equally. They do not. They have egregiously played favorites in a way that is surprising for such a big and respected entity as Twitch.
The thing that sucks is, the irresponsible ways that Twitch and YouTube behave hurts everyone, because they try to sell ads on content they know advertisers wouldn't like, and when advertisers wise up they overreact and become adverse to supporting small content creators. They would rather have "safe," big content creators instead, where they can feel like they're getting their money's worth.
Any examples that can help me understand?
Perhaps the advertising angle goes hand in hand with the above inequality. Ads are essentially buying real-estate in your brain. One way is to have exclusives (i.e., buying out the room), another is Yelp-style (pay-to-play).
Twitch Booby Streamers - A Crisis of Culture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySypTRw8AvY (50:06)
If you've got the time, the above two videos are a great rundown of the current 'sexual streaming' situation on twitch by one of the first ever professional streamers. He can be a bit edgy at times, and there's swearing in the video if that's not your thing, but he has a solid, well thought-out opinion when it comes to most things. The whole situation is a mess, with crazy misogynist incel types on one side and Twitch on the other just sort of ignoring complaints and being complicit in the mass harassment of some of the women on their platform.
If you want some examples of their inconsistent application of the rules, you could check out many of the things LegendaryLea was given short temporary bans for, then compare it to e.g. the stream IamSSunny was permanently banned for, which was later arbitrarily reduced to a temporary ban - driving home just how inconsistent they are with their own rules. Mildly NSFW though, so I won't post any direct examples here.
A cynic may interpret that as the desired outcome. From a business perspective, independent YouTubers don't have much to offer the platform.
Twitch has a large number of sex workers who are just using it as a conduit to find "customers" and are not contributing to the community, but detracting from it. There are other sites dedicated to that.
This is especially problematic for female streamers who are community members and get constantly harassed with "tits or gtfo" or worse. They struggle to be taken seriously as gamers due to the cheap antics and "accidental wardrobe malfunctions" employed by the other women on the site, and are punished for it in terms of number of viewers.
Reiterating OP, the momentum of this thing looks more like -- whatever it was before -- it is becoming or has become an generalized attack on sex appeal in a realm where AO/R/18+-rated content is still frequently a kiss-of-death, if not something needlessly danced around. I get that some gamers may not want this kind of thing but, c'mon, let people be people. If it's really bothersome then leave the site and maybe management will make a change after enough follow suit. It's already buried in a ghetto of other banners under "Browse" and I didn't see and there doesn't seem to be any other way to get to it besides search.
Also the twitch community should really evaluate it's complaints about outsiders given that it exists in the husk of justin.tv's corpse.
Not saying I agree, that's what it sounds like to me.
I don't think that's exactly accurate. Presumably the major audience for both types of streamers is young boys/men.
When talking about aggregate, the small delta counts. This swings those uncommitted to looking for sexual content as well as attracting those purely looking for sexual content. To be fair, there are more hardcore sexual content out there that is just as free, so why would the population just looking for soft porn go to Twitch to do it?
It sounds more to me like they are competing more than just having different audiences.
EDIT: and more importantly, these sexual streamer are taking advantage of it, while avoiding other sites devoted to sexual content where competition would be harder for them.
The Twitch streamers in question are also creating what amounts to softcore pornography. They aren't making game videos, they are just using Twitch as an alternative to other adult camsites. That's the whole problem.
Didn't look like porn to me and she wasn't really entertaining. It's more like the people want to satisfy their fantasies and buy the attention of a pretty girl. Clearly in a non sexual way otherwise they would turn to cam girl sites.
Is this bad? I don't know but I don't have a problem with it. I feel like it's sad that people feel like they have to buy the attention of another person. But this happens with male streamers too.
I watched a guy in the IRL section since I wanted to see what the guys stream and he was letting people insult him for money. It was really strange to watch.
I don't understand alot on twitch. But I don't see the pornography on it either.
The devolution of stream content on Twitch is really is something that needs to be addressed though. Anyone that thinks that Twitch isn't turning in to a soft-core cam girls site can just load the IRL section of Twitch and see for themselves. It takes about a 30 second cursory glance to see the themes.
And it's not even like anybody is trying to hide it, the Patreon's of many of these Streamers involve rewards like "Private lewd pictures" and their "gaming" often boils down to a video of a game being played in a small corner of the screen or simply playing rhythm/dance games.
Some of these Streamers advertise the fact they work as strippers/dancers in some place, it's a really weird combination of gaming and cam-girl culture. Imho it's kinda exploitive considering how it combines two of the things young males in puberty just love to do and plays on them very heavily.
It's probably just people stuck in their teens or teenagers. It's exactly like the teenage girls loving some star they never met and thinking they'll get married and all.
The more I read and think about it the more I'm asking myself how there can such an outrage about it.
Please tell me you're kidding.
The agenda seems to be:
1) disrupt empathy/modern thought on mental issues
2) promote Russia
3) demean the US
You literally wrote you were in awe of Russia’s builders and that the US is at fault for North Korea. Wtf????
The difference here being that this star acknowledges you existing as soon as you "donate" 5$, the more money you donate the more acknowledged you supposedly become, there is a direct feedback channel here that didn't exist like that before.
It also ties heavily into the whole "attention economy" concept and I'm also very certain it's not a healthy lifestyle for the Streamers themselves, reminds me very much about that whole situation of the commoditization of interpersonal relationships that's been happening in Japan with Hostess clubs [0].
You may think this is funny, that some people are willing to pay for casual social interactions, but only because you've been lucky enough to have a functional family/friend network to fulfill those particular needs for you. Yet, not everybody is lucky like that, quite many people feel very lonely most of the time (as they are pretty much alone) but that it's not a healthy way of living for humans so they are looking for ways to cope.
The real sad thing is that this is very likely one of the main motivations for streamers and donators alike; The feeling to belong, the be acknowledged.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pW0RV2nSg0
Maybe I'm just really good now at the mental filtering of Internet, but it wasn't hard for me to find the interesting content.
That said, I can understand that it could over time degenerate, and Twitch will need to keep up quality. I think for Twitch, quality is more important then quantity. So I'm okay with some hand curation from them.
murica!
With Twitch officially prohibiting it and streamers doing it anyways, those people will be angry at the streamers, not so much at Twitch.