Microsoft Defends Xbox Live Swastika Bans

The original swastika has nothing to do with the Nazi symbol. Adolf Hitler has inverted it and adopted the symbol. Ok? Now i also reprimand the use of the same symbol. But that part is part of our history forgeting it is just even worse.

People continue to associate Freedom of Speech/Expression ONLY with the US Constitution's First Amendment.  They forget, or are unaware of, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights's Article 19, which doesn't limit to the government's activities on the issue.

And before an argument can be made regarding the fact that the US has only signed, but not ratified the UDHR, we have to remember that many countries have not agreed along the same lines as to the Rights their citizen may or may not have that the US Constitution grants us.  Yet, even the government of the US has repeatedly stepped in to "Protect the Human Rights" of citizens of those other countries.  So there should be equally no problem with the US government being held in the same regard to be forced to uphold the Human Rights recognized under the UDHR, even if the US government has not ratified those Rights.

Nightwng2000

NW2K Software

http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

the Nazis stole that symbol Hitler stole that symbol take it back give it its true meaning hit the Nazis where it hurts.

just so yknow I dont mean the symbol shown in the article above I mean like the one shown here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HinduSwastika.svg.

It's definitely not covered under the First Amendment but is it justified? No, not really. It doesn't matter, of course, since it's Microsoft's service and they can do what they like with it, but trying to justify beyond that far is just pathetic.

I have to agree with the people who argued against the banning: The swastika is not a sign of war or hatred, it is a religious symbol much like the Christian Cross, or the Star of David. Just because the Nazi Party gathered under this symbol does not mean it was designed as a symbol of war, hatred, or death.

You want to solve this problem? Stop allowing people to use display pictures or avatars entirely. You think it promotes "customisability"? Not really. Whilst I associate people to their display pictures on forums, it doesn't mean anything, I'd just resort to remembering other details about them to remember people by. The display picture was simply a tool to add a little bit of your own flair to your profile, but it's far from necessary.

Whilst I think removing them is an extreme move, I don't think disallowing any religious or political icon is as extreme. Any symbol can cause offence, if I had the letter J as my avatar (the first letter of my name) then I'm sure at least one person would find it offensive and report me for it. But ultimately, Microsoft could ban me for anything, least of all the avatar I choose (it's in their terms, guys).

-- Randi Tastix

I respect Microsoft's reasoning here but I agree that banning is heavy-handed. With all the uproars they've had over stupid bannings, you'd think by how they'd have a penalty pyramid like MMOs have. For minor infractions like offensive images or language in your profile, your account gets blocked from Live for a few hours or a day or two. For repeated infractions, the penalty gets longer and eventually you just get banned. At least give people a chance to respond to "Take down your Swastika image or lose your account" instead of banning them on a hair trigger like that.
---
I'm not under the affluence of incohol as some thinkle peep I am. I'm not half as thunk as you might drink. I fool so feelish I don't know who is me, and the drunker I stand here, the longer I get.