Collective shout seems to have expanded its scope: games like cult classic Fear And Hunger have been removed from Itch.io, while horror game VILE: Exhumed has been delisted from Steam just a week after launch.
One thing I’m hearing a lot of is that this is a Christian lobby group. I did not see obvious signs of that on their website, though some of the language felt like an intentional alternative to how I (social worker) would discuss issues of women’s empowerment. Like they were holding space to later include “LGBTQ+” in their definition of problematic content. I am more than willing to believe an activist group from that demographic would lie to push their true agenda. Who has a good news source discussing their ideology?
The founder is a well-known Christian “pro-life feminist” from Australia.
She was the founding director of Women’s Forum Australia, […] It also promotes a trans-exclusionary ideology and campaigns against transgender rights.
Right so assuming she’s not Lesbian, then her being anti-LGBTQ+ is a safe bet. If she somehow is Lesbian, she’s going to be anti-BTQ+ at the very least.
This will be fun 🍿.
(before downvoting: don’t worry, this won’t go over well)
Isn’t there some hacker group putting Collective Shout in the crosshairs?
Hope so.
Honestly horrors get old when you can read in the news about “respected people” calling to exterminate Gaza and build beachfront cottages there. Even from just reading that and knowing that the same people can put anything onto your Android devices via a Facebook update or any of the Google applications update, on a whim. Nobody will even know.
About this - is it even legal to obey such pressure?
EDIT: I mean, how is it different from banning sellers by skin color when racists complain, or by religion when Muslims complain (all Hindus are Satan worshipers, didntcha knaw), or whatever else.
EDIT2: But it pains me to see how public offering was, in fact, an important part of market regulations, when everybody just ignores it without getting 9 lifetimes in jail for executives. I was against it at some point. That is - customer associations are important, and there are almost none, and when customer associations demand businesses to act like public offering, then it’s almost as good as if enforced, and no such regulation is a good stimulus for customer associations to keep existing. But - feels shitty when it’s in the law of most countries and hasn’t been removed.
I think there are probably some skeletons in the closets of Collective Shout’s members. It’s always projection with these people.
Why cant the payment processors just fucking ignore them oh my god
I think all the higher ups are afraid to admit they consume adult content so they will act as if it’s wrong.
Or you know, try bitcoin instead? 🤷🏻♂️
The people who would typically be expected to push back against collective shout also typically wouldn’t be expected to do anything effective whereas the people involved with collective shout are the type of people who give politicians money.
Wait, that’s actually their logo? A butthole?
E Pluribus Anus.
So close to the Greendale flag from Community.
A stretched out pink butthole full of cum, yes
New punk band name found
gross, who would fuck them?
And kids, that’s how I met your mother
Yay were back to the 2000s again, Jack Thompson rises again !
don’t you mean Joe Lieberman?
That slope got real slippery real quick.
Give them an inch, they’ll take a mile.
Wow… This count have happened in the 2010’s with the anti-gaming feminist and conservative movement at the time.
If only they knew to go after payment processors instead of identity groups.
To be fair… Funger is pretty brutal, a little past regular “horror”. Definitely against the censorship tho.
Well, this is happening earlier than I thought.
Can we go after CollectiveShout Now ??
We should, but also they aren’t the root cause. If they’re gone, there’s nothing stopping a different group from doing the same thing (except for fear of retaliation). The ideal solution is to force payment processors to process any payment for legal content.
I don’t get why the gaming platforms are removing games instead of removing the objecting payment providers as a payment option for purchasing those particular games.
If visa doesn’t want people to purchase game X with Visa, then remove Visa as payment option for buying game X.
I don’t get why the gaming platforms are removing games instead of removing the objecting payment providers as a payment option for purchasing those particular games.
I think the issue isn’t that the payment providers don’t want to support the purchase of those games with their card. They want to stop offering their services to a platform that sells those games.
It appears that in the future, Itch will allow creators to opt out of payment providers, meaning that it’s probably on a per game basis, not per platform. That Itch and Steam are not making a per game solution now, is most likely because their current software doesn’t allow it and they need time to rework it. Itch has promised various changes already, Steam has been mum afaik.
Source for Itch: “For NSFW pages, this will include a new step where creators must confirm that their content is allowable under the policies of the respective payment processors linked to their account.”. https://itch.io/updates/update-on-nsfw-content
This is what Steam will probably do in the future, and Itch.io is already looking into it. There’s a reason all this garbage hasn’t splashed GOG. GOG is based in Europe, where protection laws would slap silly any financial entity trying to pull this stunt on an European company (pressure groups have weaseled censorship and moral panics with other strategies though, just not this one), and they have so many more payment processors that PayPal, Visa and MC would just be dropped entirely and immediately for any of the other dozen or so alternatives. The issue is that in the US and Australia, the three headed shit dragon already lobbied governments to pull the ladder behind them, so no other payment processor could take their place or compete with them, establishing a legal oligopoly of the old money finance club. They won and have this power due to systemic and political failures decades in the making.
I only use Steam myself, so I hadn’t checked Itch Io’s communication yet. I don’t know the platform myself so it’s quite possible that I’m misinterpreting this, but to me it appears that Itch Io will allow creators to delist payment options that they are not compliant with: “For NSFW pages, this will include a new step where creators must confirm that their content is allowable under the policies of the respective payment processors linked to their account.”.
-
Itch has come out and said it’s not Visa, it’s PayPal and Stripe.
-
Removing those payment options would cause a massive loss of revenue.
If this is true, all gamers who care about this issue of censorship should collectively boycott those payment processors. PayPal should be especially easy to disconnect from since they already suck.
But removing them from the specific games they object to would not lose any more revenue than removing the games entirely, and reduce the backlash significantly, as long as they could find 1 obscure payment provider to handle the obscure games and keep some form of access.
According to the statement someone else linked now, they will ask devs about whether they comply with the payment processors’ terms, and it sounds like those processors will otherwise be unavailable. They just had to blanket remove like this for now because they don’t actually have sufficient knowledge about all the games’ content.
We’ll see what will happen, and if it turns out devs are getting screwed in the long run, someone will fill the new market niche anyway.
-
Yeah, that’s not what the payment processors are requesting. They aren’t saying they don’t want to be used to buy this content. They’re saying, if your platform hosts this content at all then they won’t process any payments. It doesn’t matter if the option is removed if the content is still there. They’re using their power of monopoly to police content.
Do you have a source of where they are saying that?
I have seen an article about the Australian political action group that was claiming credit for getting the games banned. The story behind the start of the controversy.
And I have seen an article about the communication from Steam that they were banning games which were in conflict with the rules of their payment providers. The result basically.
But I’ve only seen conjecture and speculation about what went on to get from the start to the result. I haven’t seen any article that spelled out exactly what the different payment providers demanded from the gaming platforms, nor anything about what they discussed in between them.
And then use what?
A few options include American Express, Discover, JCB, and the Steam Wallet, which can be funded through Steam gift cards.
You overestimate the adaptability of the average software stack. I worked at companies where even adding another button to the cart screen was a monumental undertaking
