Settings and activity
43 results found
-
2 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment 
NightmareJoker2
shared this idea
·
-
3 votesNightmareJoker2
shared this idea
·
-
3 votesNightmareJoker2
shared this idea
·
-
36 votesNightmareJoker2
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
I would like to not be joined to a raid to a channel I am banned in. Merely watching a channel earns them a monetary reward of up to 30 cents every ten minutes through ads or a Turbo subscription. I do not want a broadcaster to be able to exploit my viewership as a means to give on of their streamer "friends" who has had the audacity to ban me themselves or chosen moderators who have been abusing me a financial reward.
But I would still like to know what channel they are raiding, of course. If they are choosing a channel that has been hostile and that I am banned in, it will make me like them less to varying degree, and be less generous towards them in the future as a result.
-
922 votes
We apply IP bans in Chat based on users' Moderation actions in certain cases. We don't currently plan to publicize the logic we use because we think it would make it easier for bad actors to bypass the restriction.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
"We don't currently plan to publicize the logic we use because we think it would make it easier for bad actors to bypass the restriction"
Dear me. Security through obscurity. Lovely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity#Criticism
Anyway, to all the people here complaining about their bad exes, stalkers and the like... contact the police or a lawyer, subpoena Twitch for the records of the user who has been harassing you. If they've ever spent money, this trail is the easiest to follow to their real identity.
IP bans don't work, and are merely useful as a stop gap measure to prevent large scale spam (what comes to mind is a user posting many links, many messages or sending messages, and we're talking thousands, in quick succession). The spammers aren't stupid, and insinuating that they don't know how to verify their messages were relayed is ridiculous. Lessons from email spam and gift card scams even tell us, that they intentionally design their spam messages in such a way that only the most gullible or the elderly would ever fall for them, because those kinds of people make the best victims.
The best way to deal with abusive trolls is to not let them get to you, and to not give them the attention they want. Take appropriate breaks. If what they are doing gets to you, you lose.
And for those among you who believe the ban function has been abused in a discriminatory manner or to harass you, report the channel and make your case. You will not be unbanned, but if the user who has banned you is indeed homophobic, transphobic, racist, or doing it for the sole purpose of harassing you, there will be some consequences for this. However, don't try to go back there and be hostile to them because of it, that is obviously also not okay.
-
1,809 votes
We’re happy to announce that we have released an additional update to address these concerns. Streamers can now prevent their banned users from watching their livestreams. You can find and turn on this feature in the Moderation settings section of the Creator Dashboard, through the “Stop banned users from viewing stream” toggle.
Please note, this update 1). does not prevent users from watching livestreams from an incognito window or while logged out and 2). does not prevent users from viewing VODs, clips or highlights. We plan to explore extending the functionality of bans further, including but not limited to preventing VOD and clip playback.
In addition, we’ve made an update so that users that are blocked will now automatically be blocked from watching a streamer’s livestreams.
We will leave this thread open for your other points regarding preventing view of other content types and account creation.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
There isn't even a setting that allows someone to disable the "users that are blocked will now automatically be blocked from watching a streamer’s livestreams" for me to *allow* blocked people to watch... (granted, it's only three users, one of which has deactivated their account and another who has received a permanent suspension, but still...)
It's just all kinds of bad. I don't want this. Not as a streamer, nor as a viewer.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@AriohnSylvrWolfe You are a funny one, aren't you?
The point is *antagonizing others is bad*. The feature should be removed in its entirety, because *it does not work* anyway. It's trivial to circumvent.
You will just make people mad by using it and make your problem worse. That's clearly not the solution. 🤦♀️But good luck with everything.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@PotatoMasherAnnie It doesn't email me, because I didn't vote on it. It only emails the people who voted on the suggestion (apparently). You can also disable that in the settings somewhere, I think (not sure, and I don't want to go check). I think it's good that they get emailed. It means they also receive the explanation of why this is bad that I have provided, and can read it, if they are interested. ;)
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@Sniper4690 This is not about whether something is fair or unfair or anything of the sort. I am not sidetracking anything here. I am advocating *against* its implementation, because this is an objectively *bad feature* to have.
I fully understand that you want to be rid of "problematic people" from your streams, but this is not the way to accomplish your goal.
Abuse is abuse, there is no method or means that makes it okay for someone to be abusive and antagonize someone, and especially not the perceived entitlement that chat moderation functionality may give you. You might as well come out and say that you don't want people in your stream. And that's okay, but it just isn't the road to success that you seem to think it is.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@MistyMaxGaming
To quote you, in the same way that you like to be doing:"And because you seem to believe you are not harassing here, this is the definition: 'Harassment is unwanted verbal or physical behavior intended to humiliate and offend you'"
Emphasis on "unwanted" and "intended to humiliate and offend".
1. Me commenting here and highlighting the issues with the suggestion, is not *unwanted*. In fact, that is precisely what the comment section here is for.
2. I do not in any way intend to humiliate or offend anyone. Much unlike others who have voiced their disagreement with my very valid points have repeatedly done. In fact, I didn't even do that in response to their abuse. That clearly means I'm being the better person here. It is sad that you fail to understand that and cannot take a rational approach to the problem.Again, I must reiterate, that the issue with the functionality of this suggestion is primarily that it enables people to harass people in a way that is difficult to monitor for some. While I do understand, that in some rare cases it may help you, there are more cases in which it does the opposite. People who coordinate harassment will use the very same feature to block out those who they aim to harass or people they perceive to be a threat to their activity (i.e. police) in much the same way. That makes it incredibly difficult to report such abuse, and your piece of mind that a non-working feature provides you, is simply not worth taking the last recourse a victim has away from them.
As a streamer, having an audience is something you should want, and therefore, having a few abusive people among them is neither unusual nor something that has a definite solution. It is just that this approach is not the one that is helpful or good. You talk a lot about stalking and hindering those who stalk your stream, but I have yet to see any evidence of you being stalked in your broadcast. You see, like I have said multiple times before, if you start your stream, you consent to *anyone* watching it. If you do not want people to watch something, don't stream it. And if you would prefer your stream to be a private affair for your friends, instead of acting like a public TV station, Twitch is not the place for you (and neither is YouTube, or other such services). Try a private Discord server, Microsoft Teams call or a Zoom meeting instead. This way you can manually approve who you let in, and it will actually *effectively* block out anyone you do not trust. See, it's easy.(Ironically, this is however also how abusive people tend to coordinate their harassment these days, believing that "if it is not on Twitch, the Twitch community admins don't care", but that's a whole other can of worms...)
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@MistyMaxGaming That doesn't work, either. In fact, *nothing actually does*. Not unless you want to block out a large number of legitimate users, too. And I would weigh the 100 legitimate users against the 3 abusive ones and side with not doing that.
There are users who are uncomfortable with sharing their phone numbers with online services like Twitch. Users who cannot have or operate the type of phone required to verify their number where they live.
On the other hand, getting a prepaid SIM or burner phone is trivial. In some countries (like the USA), they don't even do identity checks on new network subscribers (which means, it can't even serve as a useful discovery item in a legal proceeding), and especially abusive people with money to burn aren't hindered by this kind of thing *at all*.
And this "generating phone numbers" you speak of? As easy as clicking a button for anyone who works at a mobile phone store (simple sales people who don't know what they are doing, no special tech skills needed) or SIP trunking provider (IT type worker; hiring requirements usually involve a Bachelor's or engineering degree of some sort).
Remember: The sort of people you want to block here are the kind who will actively seek out professions that enable their abusive behavior.You can't win. Instead, you'll produce a new normal in which everyone knows how to evade your blocking methods, and then you'll have completely lost.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@bnshiy Sir, that is not the reason they were banned. They were banned for a different reason. Specifically, that reason was *banning me*. I don't care about them, but if they perform actions which result in the abuse of the Shared Ban Info feature, they get banned. It's really just that simple. And that you're the one who complains about it is just even more concerning.
Criticism is fine. You see, all I am doing is criticizing you for your ignorance.
And I am being constructive when I do. Pointing out what the issue is, and giving you options to resolve it. Yet, you just continue to be ignorant of the problem and continue to be abusive towards me instead.I don't report everyone. Only those of you who break the Twitch terms of service. Like you did again, just now. Insulting someone you don't agree with, using derogative terms and the like is just not okay.
And true, it is possible that nothing happens. Do you know why? Because, like me, the Twitch community administrators are professionals. They are not like you. They will, at their discretion, weigh the options and effects of enforcement actions and they may leave you alone, if that might result in making the problem worse, because you are just going to circumvent a suspension. This just makes it more difficult to monitor your behavior across the community and collect evidence of your abuse for a victim who would like to seek legal action or prosecution (in case of a crime).I am also not stalking or insulting you. And if you think watching a stream is stalking, then I guess you don't know what stalking is. But here, let me give you a hint: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html#p2263 (of note, if you consent to any of what is listed in section 238, or are required to do so in order to resolve a dispute, it doesn't apply, of course)
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@kariinfu That wasn't a threat. And it wasn't really directed at you either. I also wasn't as literal as you think I was.
Honestly, I'm not even sure what you are trying to do here. If you encouraging me to "leave some likes while you’re at it" means you want my attention, this is not the way to go about it. Why would I be interested in someone like you? I'm not interested in people who enjoy the mistreating of others. I am most certainly not going to your channel to watch so you can earn ad revenue (apparently Twitch would even pay you a bonus of up to 30 cents every 10 minutes of me watching). I don't want to reward such behavior of hostility, you see.
And since you mentioned stalking... publishing false rumors about someone, or even hinting at others about how someone is stalking you (especially when that is not true!) is harassment, and also a form of stalking in itself. Both of those are *actual crimes* that you can be prosecuted for. Granted, the penalty is less than two years of prison time in most jurisdictions, and a court ordered "apology letter" is the most common form of "punishment" (quite useless, since the damage is done), but do you really want that kind of thing on your record for 10 years? I wouldn't want that if I were you...
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@NoxturnalNyx Yes. What I provided was constructive feedback.
Let me put it this way: Would you rather
1. feel safe and genuinely believe you are safe because someone told you that the fence in front of your house keeps bad people out (and some good people, too), or
2. know that bad people can just jump over the fence with little effort, and only good people suffer (they have to jump the fence, too!), because everyone is made to have such a fence?I'm going to give you a bit of time to think it over, and then we can have a discussion over where priorities are misplaced here, if you want. Or not. Up to you. ;)
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@key_lerrs_ That entirely depends on what the complaint is about. What is and isn't good behavior is not a democracy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobbing
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@bnshiy You have earned yourself the report card twice, no, wait... three times! Much wow.
1. called me toxic
2. used a slur as a reason for a ban
3. suggested I "get help"You truly are an amazing abusive person, indeed. Congratulations, you earned yourself an extra special prize. You may guess what it is, but I'm sure you won't figure that one out quickly enough.
PS: I don't wonder why you don't like me. It's very clear to me. You're the exception, though. ;)
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@kariinfu It's not like that. I have an automated tool for this. It just collects all the accounts I interact with and alerts me of "suspicious behavior". It's how I manage harassment. Please don't let it bother you. I don't care about you in the slightest. I don't even know you. But if you show any signs of hostility towards me, I'm going to have to respond appropriately. I'm sure you understand.
Calling someone a creep is not nice. This very behavior of yours is harassment. Consider yourself reported for your conduct. ;)Oh, and for anyone else who thinks it wise to do this, don't. You will just go on a big list of abusive users and will be banned everywhere, once I get to reviewing the details of your abuse. You better hope your record is squeaky clean. Chances are it isn't, though, and you'll get prison time. <3
"You’re very clearly butthurt about being “unfairly” banned from a stream in the past"
No, I don't care about being banned, if being banned is all it was. If you ban me, you do only one thing: You display unprofessionalism, rudeness, and hostility. And if you then go around spreading the message, then it's harassment. But wait... that's *exactly* what you are doing! Supposedly it's a "feature". 🤦♀️An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@MistyMaxGaming I see you have blocked me on Twitch because you didn't agree with what I said here. I am sorry, but that earned you the ban card in all channels I moderate. It makes it so that you cannot see or receive a warning about your conduct. It's really unfortunate that you made this decision. It was a very poor one. I didn't want to have to do that.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@bnshiy How about you stop being abusive towards others and contribute constructively to the conversation instead? 😉
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@MistyMaxGaming Standard M.O.: Use one account you don't know about to monitor, use another to harass you.
This "feature" can't work. It is only useful to those who want to be abusive, and it only hurts the decent users who aren't. Seriously, give up trying to make the point that this helps, because it doesn't.
Yes, it works against children with little to no tech literacy. But guess what: They aren't watching your stream. And if they are, the odds of that are beyond slim, so slim, in fact, that the odds of you using it against a decent person on accident are so much higher.
I have been a channel moderator for a featured channel on Mixer (yes, it doesn't exist anymore 😟), which was with over 15000 concurrent viewers, the most popular channel on that site *for months*. Guess where all the trolls went. Yes, the most popular channel. Nowhere else. Setting like 6-7 terms on auto-moderate in the chatbot took care of over 95% of their abuse, too. The rest we just deleted. Because guess what? We knew they were children barely old enough to use the service. We forgave them for their ignorance, because that is the sensible thing to do. If they overdid it we timed them out for a few days. Because guess what? They can come back when they grow up. There was only one guy, who after much deliberation we actually banned. We banned him, because he wanted the game that you could play through the stream all to himself and started spouting veiled threats when other people were playing with him and he could not be argued with. (this game, if you were curious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIHMnFDFTxo )"And with the ban list. The only way another streamer sees it is if that streamer specifically shares it with another streamer."
Incorrect. If a streamer bans someone, and then raids another channel, the raided channel also receives this "list", by virtue of the banned users being marked "suspicious" in that channel, and it even tells them why (because they are banned in the raiders channel). It's even worse, though. Even if the streamer knows the person and clears the marker away, the next time any streamer, even the same streamer, raids the channel and the user is still banned there, the marker is added *again*. Believe me, the feature is *annoying*.
Onto your second paragraph...
*IT DOES NOT WORK*, THOUGH.
At best you will antagonize them, they will get their "friends" to help and you make the problem worse for yourself. I've been there. Trust me. The best way to deal with this is to either get law enforcement involved, or to shut up and not giving them attention (but careful, that alone may also set them off if it appears deliberate). But lastly, don't forget, even a normal person will get upset in the same way, if you treat them like this. Don't mistake them being mad at you for being abusive as abuse. Getting mad in the face of abuse is a healthy response.
Let me repeat: THE SAFETY YOU WANT, YOU CANNOT HAVE, BECAUSE *TECHNOLOGY DOES NOT WORK LIKE THIS*.
You don't want people to watch? STOP STREAMING.
Like seriously... what are you even doing?
Every TV station operator knows this, why don't you? By the mere act of broadcasting, you *consent* to *anyone* viewing it. Act accordingly. Anything less is unprofessional.
Giving you the false sense of security of "That makes me feel comfortable with the abusive viewers not being able to see me", a security which you don't actually have, and cannot have, is worse. It may encourage you to act in a manner that compromises your safety further.
Unsavory people exist. We know. (Ironically, this is the same argument someone made earlier on about keeping this nonsense... see how that works?)An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@darthclide @merbearlorelei @VelvetChokehold @bnshiy Anyway I banned you all and put you on a shared ban list of known abusive users on Twitch for your abusive behavior here. Let's see how you like a taste of your own medicine. Good day, you lose.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@darthclide I do not care if they don't like me. I am a decent person. If they don't like me they are disturbed or side with someone who is disturbed.
@merbearlorelei This can't be implemented. It *does not work*. Every form of restriction that you can place on a user is very easy to circumvent, for someone who wants to be abusive: You can make another account. Or better yet, switch to one that you made months or years ago. And now you're thinking... but wait, we can IP ban people. No, you can't. VPNs, proxies and wait for it, *other internet connections* exist. Trust me, I have been dealing with stalkers and pedophiles from places like KiwiFarms and the OnA forums for years. These tools are *useless*.
What they are though, is a tool for the abusive people to bully and harass you with.
If you condone such behavior, the problem is *you*.@VelvetChokehold Yes, they do. They owe me not to violate my human rights, to not incite harassment against me, and to not abuse me. And they owe me to follow the Twitch terms of service, for whatever those are worth. It completely baffles me that you don't understand that.
@bnshiy No. Not well said. Clear display of the same ignorance I've been talking about.
Twitch should stop implementing features that can be used for the abuse of others, but don't actually work for their intended purpose.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@VelvetChokehold
I do not care if I am not welcome there by some people in the chat. If they don't like me, they can shut up and leave and come back when I'm gone. It's what I do. Anything beyond that is simply disrespectful and rude. I don't visit a streamer's channel for the people in their chat. I talk to them in the same way as I talk to any stranger on the internet.
And if I make you uncomfortable, you should really consider what you did *yourself* that made it this way. There is something very wrong with you, or someone else who had an influence on your state of mind in this manner, if my presence ever makes you uncomfortable."Why not just let them have this and move along to other channels where you might find content suitable for you."
Because, like mentioned above, *they are harassing me* through intentional abuse of the shared ban info "feature", or ignorant misuse of the same.
You can, instead of banning someone, politely tell them that they are not welcome there. Because it's like you said, "If you don't feel welcomed somewhere then why would you go back there". But there's only one person of whom I will respect such a thing: The person who runs the channel. That means the streamer. Nobody else. And only if they wish for this intentionally, with full knowledge of why, and their reason is accurate and sound. A reason of "my community is not a good fit for you", "my chat doesn't like you", or "you were banned in some other channel" is of course not acceptable, but I can respect it, if you *tell me* (it makes you a terrible person, and I want nothing to do with you).
If that reason does however involve the musings, gossip and hearsay of abusive people in their chat, then no. I am not ever going to respect that. I fully, and without exception expect them to tell me who those people are, and to ban them from their chat and report them to Twitch's community admins instead. And if that means I turn into a problem, then so be it. I will not stand for harassment and bullying, ever. If you harass someone, the harassed person is entitled by legal statute to do everything within their means (including "harassing you about the issue") until you stop.And yes, to make the point with your analogy, if you hide the tools for your abuse, or things that you have stolen from someone in your house, *the abused are allowed* to break in, and disable the tools for your abuse or take back their property. (So long as they don't damage your house while doing so)
As far as Twitch is concerned, though, that means removing moderator privileges from abusive channel moderators, preventing the abusive channel moderators from moderating any channels, or preventing them from being granted moderator privileges again.
It means unbanning users who have been banned by such moderators.
It means providing them with the same tools to combat this form of abuse as any other.
And it means being transparent about the issue.But most importantly it means not adding features that can be abused, but provide no actual benefit (since they realistically can't work to do the task they are intended for), and it means *not removing* features that are useful for combating abuse after the fact (like the public follower API), but the removal of which fazes abusive people very little, since they can just be prepared and log follow and chat events in all channels to compile a list of channels a user they want to abuse is visiting.
It means thinking ahead and predicting the results and effects of your changes *before you make them*.
All of these features appear poorly implemented (mostly because in the real world, it can't actually be done), shortsighted (meaning they have adverse effects nobody thought about), and like they are merely meant to placate a few loud voices (streamers have loud voices, because they can yell their ignorant wishes to an audience of a moderate size, who will then similarly ignorantly regurgitate what they say and support them in sufficient numbers to inflate demand) and to provide them with a false sense of security, of which in actuality they have none, and can only have none.An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@darthclide
I guess you don't know what the ban experience is like.
1. Unlike a timeout, which merely prevents you from chatting, the chat is *hidden from your view*.
2. All third-party apps (API clients) that are connected to the channel with your user account at the time you are banned are kicked from the channel.
3. If the chat is then abusive towards the user who was just banned, you can't even see it.
4. If you are crafty enough to help yourself in this situation, by opening the chat from an incognito window or a different account (or doing this at all times to not lose any messages that are maybe worthy of a report), if you report the abusive users, *Twitch's community admins do not care*.
5. Shared ban info exists. The channel you have just been banned from can share their list of banned users with any other channel. In fact, they do this whenever they raid a channel. Being banned by itself turns into harassment of any banned user all by itself, merely by the channel raiding another channel that banned user may be active in. The feature is easily abused. Most moderators don't enter a reason about why a user is banned, and even if they do, the shared "mod comments" are separate and not available for review to the banned user, either, and can also not be reported for inaccuracy.
6. The community admins do not *ever* act on a report of a channel, behavior in a channel, or a moderator of a channel, from a user account that is banned in that channel. This is extremely problematic. Please don't ask how I know this.And no, a streamer *does not* have every right to ban a viewer. Banning someone is also a form of abuse. Banning someone who isn't disruptive to the broadcast in any way is simply unprofessional.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
@Squeemeister I am not labeling all broadcasters as abusers. And it doesn't matter that the viewers outnumber the broadcasters, either. They, like the broadcasters, are largely not abusive.
The problem is merely, that these measures do not even work. You can make a new account, or open an incognito window (this option will not show you the chat history and channel point redemptions, though) and still watch or chat. Since this is the case, it is not at all reasonable to simply dismiss the issue in this way.
It is not okay to "protect" only the "streamers", and give the viewers none (yes, I realize some are both, even some more one than the other), going even so far as making it almost impossibly difficult for a viewer to file a valid report against a streamer or other viewers of theirs after having been banned. This is completely ignorant of human behavior. Streamers, just like viewers, are just people, and should all be given the same options of dealing with abuse.
However, because they often have a large audience, it is much easier for a broadcaster, their moderators and their other viewers to harass a viewer than the other way around: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobbing
It doesn't even take anything special for them to do so. Just someone (broadcaster, moderator, other viewer) calling a viewer "annoying" can be more than enough to set off the bullies. Just like in school.An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
I see a few glaring issues with this. There are broadcasters, and moderators of some broadcasters who will abuse the moderation functionality to harass certain viewers, too.
To give an example: From the list above, item #1 is already implemented (actually has been a few years now). It is normal that streamers and their moderators think that it is their channel, that they are in charge, and that they are allowed to ban whoever they want, whenever they want, for any reason, or even no reason at all. It is then a common occurrence, that both the broadcaster, their moderators and the rest of the community make fun of, and bully the user who has just been timed out or banned, and their chat message purged from the chat. The chat being hidden from view while this is happening makes it incredibly difficult for a viewer to report this abusive behavior from the participating users to the community administrators for site-wide enforcement. And to make matters even worse, since July 2022, if the abusive users enjoy a large amount of trust in the community, the Shared Ban Info feature will now amplify their abuse by marking whoever they banned from their chat for any reason *other than* actual abusive behavior as suspicious in any channel they raid or that their channel editors (who are usually also moderators) raid (sometimes without the broadcaster's knowledge) and giving the target channel the false impression that the user they banned for personal differences is purportedly abusive, when that couldn't be further from the truth.I can tell you from personal experience, for having been harassed in this way on Twitch myself, that the existing requirements already make it beyond difficult (and expensive!) to bring this form of abuse to the attention of the community administrators. It is incredibly annoying to have to make a separate user account, with a different email address, to get another cellphone number to "verify" it with, just so you can report abuse in a channel you have been banned from with the message context.
I also live in Germany, and all the harassment and abuse related reporting options turning into legal reporting options under "Netzwerkdurchsuchungsgesetz", which essentially means they're going to the legal team, which almost always rejects them within minutes, since the abuse doesn't meet criminal threshold in their view, instead of the community admins doesn't help much, either.And then here you are, requesting that all the things broadcasters intentionally, and with informed consent, broadcast to the public internet, be hidden from those who they abuse by banning them from their channel, and worse?
Please stop spreading the idea that only streamers get harassed. Viewers get harassed, too, sometimes by streamers, even. What you are proposing is making a harassment victim powerless to do anything about it. And that is not okay. -
9 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
I would add to that, that ban appeals and their history should be preserved for review, and that the channel owner can always see them. There are channel moderators who abuse the ban and timeout functions to troll and harass viewers also. If they ban someone on their sole discretion, they can simply squash any appeal with the broadcaster being none the wiser. This is especially bad, if the viewer has no other option to reach the broadcaster about the issue.
NightmareJoker2
supported this idea
·
-
11 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
While the whole "marking as suspicious" feature by itself is problematic, _that the messages are specially highlighted is intentional_.
It is the job of the broadcaster (who is also a moderator of their own channel!) and their moderators to evaluate the user's conduct and *remove* the marker as quickly as possible (majority of cases), or enforce on their abuse (if they are indeed abusive).
Also, users can tell if their chat messages are being relayed in the chat or not. It's not even hard. Just open the channel twice and observe if the message you sent shows up in the other instance. Restricted users are also told their message wasn't posted as if they had tried to send a message with a blocked word in it. Since they usually believe the message was okay to send, this then commonly results in them trying to find out what words they were not allowed to use so that they may send it. This happens by users who are abusive and those who are not alike. It is not strange or unusual for a user to be confused about why they can't send a message they tried to send. -
14 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
I am against this.
In fact, a precise granular approach to what interactions a user is blocked from should be used instead.
Currently there is Ban which prevents you from chatting and hides the chat (with the option to hide the broadcast), and stops you from making clips of the channel, following if you aren't already (this is new), using bits, subscribing to the channel and gifting subscriptions to anyone in that channel.
There is also Block/Ignore which prevents someone from whispering (direct message) you, makes them unfollow your channel, if they were following, prevents them from following your channel, prevents them from gifting a subscription to you (in another channel), prevents them from subscribing to your channel, and hides the blocked users chat messages from your view in all channels in which you don't have moderator privileges (or higher)There is a perfectly valid use case for having it as is. For example, there may be a user whom you are happy to have talk in your channel, but which you don't want to whisper you or talk to while you are enjoying your off-time in some other channel (granted, this is weird, but there are people like this). It is also for this reason, that having block/ignore making someone unfollow is not that great.
Of course, people generally hit the block button too easily without a real understanding of what it does (because they are looking for one function only, but none of the others), and really should have a very good reason before using it, so... maybe not having it entirely might also be a good idea. 🌝
-
15 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
I am strongly against this. Also, from what I gather, this is already happening since a few months ago (before this suggestion was posted, even). The follow does not get restored when you are unbanned, however (so I guess it's only half like this).
As a viewer *I* am the one who decides who I want to follow, and I find it wholly inappropriate for anyone, streamer, moderator, or another viewer to dictate what channel I want to watch. As such they should get no say in the matter.
You don't want me to talk in your chat? This is fine.
But if you broadcast content I want to watch to the public internet, and anyone can get a notification about when that is happening, you get no say about this whatsoever to single out anyone in particular and restrict them from getting it as well.
If a streamer doesn't want people to watch their stream, they shouldn't be streaming. It's as simple as that.
Blocking a user already makes them unfollow your channel. And while I posit that this feature is useful in the sense that you can use it to tell if a user has blocked you (since it greys out the follow button on the website), and in this way be aware of their hostility towards you, they still shouldn't be able to do this.Lastly, it goes without saying, but you shouldn't be broadcasting *anything* that you don't want others to see. This includes, if there is just one person that you don't want to see it. Because, at the end of the day, there is nothing you can do to prevent them from seeing it, recording it and sharing it with whoever they want. There is no method that will work. Not one thing that is effective. And as such, if there is nothing that is effective, it is better to not even try, because it will just lead to abuse (intentional abuse!), accidental misuse, and no real ability to undo your mistake (there's no option to reset the ban counter, remove the suspicious or restricted marker from *other* channels, restore the follow with the old timestamp, etc.). the damage will be done and there's no way back without a database administrator manually messing with the audit log.
-
1,114 votes
Twitch
responded
Hey all! Thanks for this thread. We recently deprecated anonymous Cheering after we discovered it was being abused. While we understand some viewers prefer not being recognized for Cheering, we made this change to ensure a safer experience for those who were negatively impacted.
We’ve also heard your concerns on what this means for the future of Bits. This deprecation is not related to any plans to limit Cheering with Bits on Twitch, and is solely focused on providing a safer experience for our community.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
I didn't even notice that it was gone.
Please bring it back. 👻
Anonymous cheering was the only way to financially reward a broadcaster without them knowing who it was, and without decreasing their ad revenue (gift sub recipients no longer get ads in the channel), or someone else benefiting.In fact, please add another feature to anonymous cheering: The no alert cheer. Let me give a broadcaster money, that they don't know I gave them (I don't want special treatment from them or harassment from their viewers for doing it), with the only indication that they are receiving it being the analytics (must not be available while live to prevent alerts from an integration) and stream summary from after the broadcast. ❤ (PS: This should be available while banned from the channel, there is no possibility of abuse here)
NightmareJoker2
supported this idea
·
-
611 votes
Hi, thanks for your feedback!
This status is to let you know your idea has been reviewed. Your idea is open for voting/comments from other Twitch community members. This is a great time to share your idea with others. Learn more about status updates here.
---
For the community: If you like this idea, please vote on it and feel free to add on how it would help you in the comments.
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
It is already possible to report anonymous sub gifters. On the alert in the chat, simply click the username of the gift sub recipient to open their chat card, click the three little dots, and select Report <username> in the menu.
In the dialog that opens, if the username
1. is used to harass someone (broadcaster, moderator, viewer, etc.) select "Username", "Bullying or Harassment", and then "Targeted Abuse".
2. is sexually inappropriate, select "Username", "Bullying or Harassment", and then "Unwanted sexual advances"
3. is perfectly acceptable as a username by itself, but there are multiple gifts that spell a sentence that isn't, select "Username", "Bullying or Harassment", and then "Malicious Pranks"
4. is perfectly acceptable, but there are a lot of single user gift subs in quick succession, select "Username" or "Alerts and Graphic Overlays", "Spam, Scams, or Bots" and then "Spam".
In the text field labeled "Tell us more" on the last dialog page, describe the issue well. Be an effective communicator.
The community administrators can see on their dashboard the details and context of the report, including what channel page the report was submitted from, the user who was reported, the message or alert that was reported, at what time, and when it was sent, as well as recent account activity (they can manually review other activity at their discretion), and they can make an appropriate decision based on the information, too. They will also take into account the details of your report, and be more lenient, if you explain to them that you don't want them severely punished.In most cases of username reports, the offending user will only be asked to change their username, unless it is clear that the chosen username was selected with obvious intent of abuse, or the user regularly sets an inappropriate username or customized display name (Asian languages only).
Things you can do yourself, without burdening the community safety team:
1. You can ban the gift recipient from your channel, banned users cannot subscribe or receive gift subscriptions while they are banned (globally or from the channel).
2. It is also possible to block the gift recipient (like you would to not see their messages in channels you are not a moderator in and to prevent them from whispering you), users you have blocked can also not subscribe to or receive gift subscriptions in your channel. -
2,199 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
Bias is occurring in ad offers. This is determined by the advertiser paying for the ads, and the options Twitch offers to them, based on which they can target their ads to the viewers, to reach the, in their sole discretion, most suitable target demographic. Targeted advertising is not a new concept. The criteria upon which advertisers want to target their ads vary and are very complex.
That you aren't told how advertisers advertise, and not allowed to game the system by specifically seeking out content, categories, tags, keywords in stream titles and chat messages, or abusing the moderation controls to stay within viewership volume targeted, is a good thing. The last thing the advertisers want is you catering to their ad revenue in a manner that results in lower conversion rates and sales of the products they are advertising for.
In short, to put it in context with how this came about with you: Advertisers tasked with advertising pet food to those who "watch animal cams at work and likely have a pet at home" do not want you to go and randomly decide to use the "Animals, Aquariums, and Zoos" category, when your regular viewership consists of "people mostly interested in video games" and your reactions while playing it, and very likely consists of a significantly lower fraction of pet owners, and therefore less people per impression (their expense) who are interested in buying said pet food, just so you can earn more money.I do agree with you, the analytics are lacking, but only in that Twitch should add region variance and a more precise time scale to telling you where your revenue comes from. However, that alone is dangerous, if it results in streamers targeting certain times of day, where viewership from certain regions is increased, thereby diluting the discovery options for the viewers who largely struggle with paying attention to more than one channel at once (they certainly do on a mobile device!) and making the revenue situation worse for everyone as a result, since the pool of available turnover is limited, even if in constant flux, because most advertisers have a spending cap or monitor their conversion rates.
-
1,113 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
I am strongly against this.
My reasoning is as follows: The free 1-month subscription any Amazon Prime subscriber is given every month of their Amazon Prime subscription is an expense only proposition. It is a marketing tool that is meant to drive engagement on Twitch. If viewers who are Amazon Prime subscribers are reminded to give their Prime Sub to the streamer they had previously given it to, the only one who benefits from this is that streamer who receive the last Prime Sub. There will be no even distribution and the viewer is not encouraged to seek out new streamers to watch and give that "free" Prime Sub to, with the featured broadcasters on the front page or who already make the most in ad revenue due to their high viewer counts reaping the lions share of it. This already happens with the current system, but viewers being notified to renew it without the broadcaster making content that drags them in all by itself would just amplify the issue of driving engagement and revenue to those who are already receiving quite a lot of it, and no longer drive any genuine engagement to the rest of Twitch and its discovery channels. And worse, it is suggestive to the viewer in a manner that is very little to their benefit.
I would posit that turning the purple "Subscribe" button into a "Prime Sub available" button on every channel that has less than 350 subscribers (Prime subs do not and also should not contribute to the Partner+ requirement) until used is a much better option. This way at least, the smaller streamers viewers can actually still talk to and interact with in a responsive manner could get a much needed revenue boost that keeps them doing what they are doing instead of giving up on their dreams of being a streamer. -
698 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
I am strongly against this.
My reasoning is as follows: The free 1-month subscription any Amazon Prime subscriber is given every month of their Amazon Prime subscription is an expense only proposition. It is a marketing tool that is meant to drive engagement on Twitch. If viewers who are Amazon Prime subscribers can just set and forget their Prime Sub to any streamer, and have mostly no interest in Twitch, the only ones who benefit from this are Affiliate and Partner streamers on Twitch. And the only benefit is a financial one. And worse, there will be no even distribution, with the featured broadcasters on the front page or who already make the most in ad revenue due to their high viewer counts reaping the lions share of it. This already happens with the current system, but them not automatically cancelling and needing to be renewed would amplify the issue, and no longer drive any genuine engagement to Twitch from those who forget in exchange. -
64 votesNightmareJoker2
supported this idea
·
-
9 votesNightmareJoker2
supported this idea
·
-
93 votesNightmareJoker2
supported this idea
·
-
2 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
This is a terrible idea. What you are proposing is relegating the ban function to a lynch mob.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobbing for more, and why such behavior is unacceptable anywhere. Bullying is bad, and democratic approval does not make it okay. -
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment NightmareJoker2
commented
I am against this.
This should be handled by the block function, specifically, if the viewer has blocked the broadcaster, the broadcaster's channel should not be included in the recommended channels anymore.
There are channels I am banned from that I still like to watch, cases even, where the broadcaster is completely unaware of it, and I have no way to reach them to get the issue resolved. I don't want a filter bubble that excludes me from seeing if the broadcast is live.
Further ideas: This badge could look like the 🚫 (prohibited) emoji.
There may even be a second type of badge. Red for the current user context, and yellow for the channel owner, moderator and editor contexts, that indicates to broadcaster, moderators, and an API integration, if a user has blocked the broadcaster or a moderator of the channel, such that #3 could be automated.