>>179416 (OP)
>why would you ever kick someone in a video game?
Only when they fuck with the game. Stuff that can be objectively defined, instead of vague bullshit rules that are selectively enforced like in your average multiplayer nu-game:
<when there's a faggot who softlocks the game or causes the game to freeze or crash
<when there's a faggot doing dumb shit that hampers progress like blocking the way, messing with your aim, or giving ammo and health packs to enemies, etc.
<faggot micspamming ear-rape, especially in games without mute
>>179436
You forgot to mention that we're long past the era of self-hosted community servers. Now everything goes through corporate servers and there are draconian, vaguely-phrased ((( CoCs ))) that get selectively enforced, and psyops run by corporations that condition little kids to become pseudo-jannies and perform game corpos' jannies' jobs for free.
>>179486
>2016 election
Shit happened way before the election. There always were sensitive snowflakes, but everyone used to laugh at them and milk them for laughs as they had meltdowns. Things went to shit around the time the whole 'muh safespaces' and 'muh toxicitay', and other bullshit like CoCs started spreading everywhere.
In the end, the real racists and bigots are the ones promoting ((( tolerance ))). The slogan says it best: 'We're intolerant only towards the intolerant*'
*intolerant means anyone I don't like
>>180477
>Any way this could be abused?
Same weakness as any other good goy points system: you get bumbling retards to trigger a penalty. Works great when the company is reluctant to elaborate on what results in punishment.
Also reminder that online ((( live games ))) are basically testbeds for behavior control programs and social score systems.
>>180448
>Have we hit a freedom bottleneck?
Think of is this way: all this virtue signaling is an act by ((( them ))) to shame you into surrendering your rights for their own benefit, while garnering positive PR.