I believe Raze already suggested you consult a legal help in that regard. "Hate speech" is not the same as calling names. You saying that "hate speech" happen, doesn't make it so. If you believe "Hate speech" took place and Larian employees failed to interviene you should also be comfortable talking to a lawyer about it. And if you believe you don't have the case then.... well, you don't have a case, and this thread is pointless. Feel free to write to Larian management and media, but I doubt anyone will pick it up, because there is nothing here.
I do not wished "harm" for others, unless you consider an unpaid job a "harm", then you have to admit that Larian harm italian translators by taking their translation without paying them (and avoiding to pay other translators that offered themselves to do the job).
That's a silly way of reasoning. No company is required to translate their game into every language. You accuse Larian is not doing their own italian translation
because they expect a free one to be made. That's an unsubstantiated claim, based on reasons and motivations formed purely in your head.
Lawyers costs money in my country, maybe in Irland they are free but I highly doubt it.
If calling autistic people "whiny", "petty", "obsessed" etc. is not hate speech, than also insulting any minority in the same way wouldnt.
Now, if someone in this forum had called black people "whiny", "petty", "social stunted" etc. or used "the N word" I am pretty sure that all of your relativistic denial wouldnt show. If you don't think that what I listed is hate speech, than explain why you think that, instead of stopping your reasoning in a sterile dubitative attitude (like Raze always did).
You are also assuming that protesting for anything that is not highly illegal is pointless. I think the sillyness of this concept can be evident without any further explanation. Do you really need more explanation for the difference between legality and ethicity?
Regarding the "harm" argument, I am just saying that wishing an unpaid job to someone (I was clearly provoking btw, and you have taken literally... And I am the autistic one lol) is not a "harm wishing". You obviously slide your answer in the diversionary and less utile aspect. That is semanticly uncorrect reasoning. Believe me, if there are some sillyness here, it is not coming from me.
