this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2025
486 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

73656 readers
4167 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 64 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

That slope got real slippery real quick.

[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 49 points 6 days ago (8 children)

Why cant the payment processors just fucking ignore them oh my god

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.

[–] notarobot@lemmy.zip 4 points 5 days ago

I think all the higher ups are afraid to admit they consume adult content so they will act as if it's wrong.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] heyWhatsay@slrpnk.net 32 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Isn't there some hacker group putting Collective Shout in the crosshairs?

[–] Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago
[–] k0e3@lemmy.ca 39 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Wait, that's actually their logo? A butthole?

[–] sdfric88@lemmy.sdf.org 22 points 6 days ago (3 children)

A stretched out pink butthole full of cum, yes

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 6 days ago

New punk band name found

And kids, that's how I met your mother

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago

E Pluribus Anus.

So close to the Greendale flag from Community.

[–] raynethackery@lemmy.world 31 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I think there are probably some skeletons in the closets of Collective Shout's members. It's always projection with these people.

[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 51 points 6 days ago (8 children)

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.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 38 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 18 points 6 days ago (3 children)
  1. Itch has come out and said it's not Visa, it's PayPal and Stripe.

  2. Removing those payment options would cause a massive loss of revenue.

[–] scratchee@feddit.uk 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

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.

[–] LwL@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago

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.

[–] sykaster@feddit.nl 19 points 6 days ago

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

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 days ago

Interesting! Maybe it's a similar situation on Steam, but the payment providers demanded the platforms act immediately (or at least too soon for them to make such changes).

Or maybe Steam gets too many chargebacks on NSFW games and is ok with this? Lol

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 26 points 6 days ago

Give them an inch, they'll take a mile.

[–] Strider@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago

This will be fun 🍿.

(before downvoting: don't worry, this won't go over well)

[–] MITM0@lemmy.world 27 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Can we go after CollectiveShout Now ??

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

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?

[–] hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 5 days ago (3 children)

The founder is a well-known Christian "pro-life feminist" from Australia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melinda_Tankard_Reist

[–] Dojan@pawb.social 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yay were back to the 2000s again, Jack Thompson rises again !

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 22 points 6 days ago

Soon: games causes mass shootings! Prohibit all games! And the payment processors will just comply because again they're semi dictatorial greedy fucks

[–] curiousPJ@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago

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.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago

Well, this is happening earlier than I thought.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

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.

[–] wabafee@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

Gotta love the Collective Cunts.

load more comments
view more: next ›