By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Machiavellian on 16 June 2014
Edit Thread
Shinobi-san said:
Machiavellian said:
Shinobi-san said:
Azerth said:
well if were going to bash ms for banning a guy for breaking the rules even though its for there benefit then we should also bash steam for doing the same thing

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=838640


This guy took a security exploit public because Steam wouldnt address the issue....

His actions has vastly different repurcussions. Yes steam is still dumb for not wanting to initially fix it...but by him going public he was making the problem worse.

Completely different case to this.

Actually no it is not.  If you signed something that says do not do this or this will be the result.  It matters now how serious the offence the company must follow through.  Its really that plain and simple.  By not following through the company risk everyone dismissing the policies and conditions for the program.  People really need to get off this entitlment type of thinking.  

Its a different case in that the actions taken by the owner/developer was different. Making a security exploit public can have a major impact. Its an act with purposeful malicious intent.

Both of them breaking the rules is the same yes. And im not saying MS was wrong to do this, but they could have dealt with it better. Companies need to be a bit flexible when it comes to situations like this.

I personally do not believe you deal with breaking the NDA any better.  The person decided either through ignorance or because they did not care go against an agreement they signed.  After that point, they forced MS to have to respond by doing exactly what is stated in the agreement.  It sends a statement that do not go against the agreement or you will be banned.  If someone is getting riled up that MS had to ban this person for violation of the terms of contract those those people really need to grow up.

Companies should not be flexible on such things as this because it opens up a lot of gray area.  Playing in the gray foster this belief that you can violate a contract and there are no penalty.  Its this very thinking that cause corporation nighmares because when you play in the gray anything is up for interpretation.  Once you let that cat out of the bag then someone else will push a little further until you reach the same situation as now.  If you want to be part of the beta then do not go against its policy, it really should be that cut and dry.