Profile of Dwighty

Everyone who playes multiplayer games is competitive, otherwise you'd play tetris or campaign instead. That's also part of the point I'm trying to make.

It's easier to get into matchmaking when you got the option to play matchmaking games who actually doesn't matter (rank-wise). This is why most people have a hobby; they want to relax and do something that doesn't constitute to your life's list of achievements.

Losing sucks, let's face it. I have a better time losing a game where I played good and my opponent played better than me, than I have losing a game where I sucked, messed up my build order or did something else stupid, because I will always TRY to win. This goes for improving as well; if you want to try out a new strat, wouldn't you do it in a setting where you didn't actually have to focus on winning, but could focus on perfecting the strategy/new build instead?

Point is that the unranked matchmaking system makes getting into SC2 a lot easier for casual and new people. It probably also makes more people play ladder games since you can kick back and relax instead of feeling the pressure of having to be competitive all the time.

Example; Having a run and participating in a marathon is 2 completely different things. I relax while I'm having my run, but I'm competitive when I'm participating in my marathon and will always care about what place I end up in.

Awesome stuff ^^

First order of business:

Barton; I'm all for the banter and dicking around, but please have some class. Mocking someone for being petty in a moment they lost seriously is fucking low and insanely uninteresting. People are people and they will bitch and moan when they lose at something. Most competitive people are seriously bad losers and for most of them this is a good thing. You might want to think that the people you look up to are the pillars of integrity, logic and honor, but the fact is that everyone has a shitty day. On those days it's easier to blame something completely irrelevant opposed to addressing what really was the issue.

IP bans are the worst possible bans (at least as long as IPv4 lives, which will be quite a while in my expectation, and even in IPv6 they aren't too great, albeit better than in IPv4).
Imagine you are a stand up comedian at a venue, doing a daily show. Someone is interrupting you all the time etc. etc. An IP ban would equal to banning the seat the person is taking up. All the troll has to do, is get another seat (aka IP, which you do by simply redialing your connection via a router restart). Not only is your ban ineffective at keeping the troll away, but also the seat you just banned will stay empty forever (the IP is banned, if someone else gets the IP 10 secs later, he will be unable to watch your stream, however unlikely it might be that exactly that person wants to view your stream). Even MAC address bans are ineffective, since you can change MAC addresses (which are device specific, as in each NIC in the world should have a unique MAC address) with the appropriate tools (it's a bit more complicated than simply restarting your router every time).
In IPv6, each device should always get the same IP, but apart from the fact that you can simply change that IP, even if you don't... it would, again, be a device specific ban (like MAC address bans)... he might not be able to watch your stream on his smartphone, but his PC and Laptop are fine etc. etc..

Just wanted to address this as you've completely missed the point of IP bans and law enforcement/preemptive measures all together. According to your analogy, you don't ban the seat the person is sitting on, you really ban his identity(his IP is is identity, not the house he's living in). Doing so for you (as a club owner) takes about 5 seconds. The banned person on the other hand has to go out and get a false identity (a new passport/whatever), and no matter how connected he is, this surely takes more effort than it took you to ban him. If you keep banning his new identities it soon enough becomes REALLY annoying for him to keep being a dick and most people will give up which anyways solves the majority of the problem.

This is a good example of "deterrent". It's not bulletproof and it's not designed to be, but it keeps it increasingly hard to be a bad boy. With your logic, any law in the real world is pointless since they can all be circumvented (tell me of a law that 100% prevents crime and is 100% impossible to get away with breaking).

tl; dr
- You don't ban someone for ghosting or stream sniping since it's entirely up to you to stream, and in games where some kind of reward is involved, people will do much worse than that in order to win.

- Barton shouldn't be cheap-shotting Hans for being a bad loser since 99% of the people are. Can't blame Hans on the other hand for not ignoring you since your troll-baiting him hard, and sometimes it's impossible to be the bigger man (I speak from experience).

- IP bans work. Nuff said.

Its not very successful for your average listed company, as neither employee, nor customer has significant influence, when compared to the shareholder.

I hope you realize that a column, in general, but in this specific case where a commercial book is promoted, is never considered evidence in favor of your argument.

Besides this, I was mainly aiming at the lack of nuance in the general view of (mostly) big corporates, which was shown perfectly in Dwighty's statement.

In general, there is a clear correlation between employe satisfaction and customer satisfaction. In today's "experience economy", the companies that rack up the least poor experiences, combined with a good product will be the winners in the long term. The music industry gets this; the movie industry don't.

Ever thought about what makes the difference between a good and a bad experience with customer service? It's ALWAYS the person who picks up the phone.

If you treat your employees solely like numbers, they will find other places to work since the wages will be better and so will the benefits. People also seem to perform better when they turn up at work for reasons other than just cashing in their paycheck.

Good luck trying to run a successful company when your bleed talent to your competitors.

Let's see if SEGA gives Relic the time and resources to implement an 'Observer Mode'. Right at the release of the game. That would be so awesome.

But for now, all we can do is wait for official announcements

Hopefully they realize that releasing a game without that in 2013 would be just silly. DoW: II had this in 2009 lol.