Blarghagh

While I agree that he gets off lightly and I seriously disagree with some of the things he does, he does at least try to defend his practices without, for the most part, attacking anyone else and he's put himself available for discussion. As one of the few who has been willing to do so, he's earned a certain amount of respect. He's also incredibly clear on that he doesn't want some of these things that GamerGate is against to happen again, such as when GamerGate says "disclose if you're donating to a patreon", he takes it further with "if it breaks trust, we're not going to do it at all anymore". He's not giving in to demands, but he's made concessions and engaging in dialogue when the majority of the journalists, editors and outlets involved have had radio silence other than "nuh uh, if you criticize me at all you're a misogynist". This is a start. The fact that this dialogue is taking place and TotalBiscuit decided to let him say his piece and did not turn it into a hit piece is something that I respect, even if some of the opinions and actions are things I do not. I think the major problem in this debate is that it's been such an enormous cluster**** of demonisation and dehumanisation and I think this is a step in the right direction when it comes to trying to fix it and even though this was a fairly defensive showing of Mr. Totilo, at least he showed.

I'm going to agree with Barothmuk that feminism can't be completely defined by radicals. I think it's dishonest to say so while railing against people completely defining GamerGate by radicals. But at the same time, these GamerGaters have seriously damaged the movement in the eyes of the public as the radical feminists have. Ironically, they're the same thing. I think most if not all GamerGaters would accept this definition: What definition people accept does not often correlate with the perception of them, or even how they act.

Props to Stephen Totilo for coming to talk to TotalBiscuit. Also, game developer Adrian Chmielarz made an interesting post regarding why he is starting to lean Pro-GamerGate: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sdmj1k

This is the part where I make a rare statement of personal condemnation: What I don't understand is that they're perfectly fine letting Stillgray speak for them. Do they just not know who he is? Have they bought into his nonsense about how gamers made him a Nazi sympathiser and his claims that he is no longer a holocaust denier? Because I don't believe he has owned up to the things he did and said, I don't even believe that he has left those things behind. If I wasn't already pro-GG, Stillgray speaking against it would have made me so. If there is one thing I can't stand, it's open and proud Nazis. Thirty years in a convent isn't enough to atone for the **** this disgusting piece of human filth has said and done. It makes me so mad that someone like that can pretend to have the high moral ground. Any ground he stands on is tainted by very definition.

I did a serious doubletake when I opened up this page and saw this. I had to look up what the hell was going on. I live in one of those cities, my brother lives in another.

Would you invite him to your World of WarCraft wedding? Would you marry him in World of WarCraft? ... I would.

No accounting for tone on the internet, I guess. :D

I consider people trying to sell me stuff on the street harassment.

I guess I better go get my tinfoil hat.

Damn, Captain Marvel? Didn't see that one coming. Carol Danvers, so we're getting a female centered and a black superhero movie with Black Panther now going on.. I guess all the Inhumans rumors were right on the money too.

I'll check that one out, Raithe. Sounds cool. In the meanwhile, I'm currently feeling very apprehensive because a little known slow-burn type horror movie called The Innkeepers is very good at setting tone and atmosphere, even if it has thus far (half an hour left) not yet delivered on scares. EDIT: Nevermind, there they come. Not very pleasant in any way, even though it has nothing incredibly scary it still totally got under my skin.

Especially with the Deadpool movie coming up. Too bad, since the Udon-run romp of those two working together was amazing. But hey, maybe he'll be in the Deadpool movie?

Taskmaster is perfect for Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., totally crossing my fingers for him to show up in a significant role. Also: I'm glad someone urged me to get back to Parks and Recreation, I didn't like the first season so I didn't stick around but it actually becomes really good afterwards so now I feel bad that I missed all of it and happy that I have so much to catch up on. Also, I may be in love with Rashida Jones.

My favourite part is where he threatened someone into working with him. That was interesting. I want to see more of that. I think the creators of this show need to take a good look at what made early House episodes so popular. This isn't a story about a hero.

What's with the barbie doll figures and pandering to male gaze? I thought this game was designed by women, for women?

Yes! The mystery is back! The only reason the story was ever interesting in the first place!

You're right, roach infiltrator from the future. That was the point of the post, anything else taken from it is reading too much into it. I suppose one could infer it as a dig at the writers of Feminist Frequency, both of which have at seperate times claimed to not play video games? But in that specific case, it would be a fact and not so much a supposition. In that case the armchair activists really are not the consumer? Either way, since Barthomuk has labeled everyone speaking in favour of GamerGate into a single entity ("you guys") and he seems to currently only be interested of rephrasing others posts in a misrepresenting and projecting manner, I see no need to take him seriously in this debate. Personally, I don't care if there are the mythical "SJW" in gaming, since I've been on the receiving end of that term more times than I care to count, but I do care about the following: - I care about indie developers who rely on exposure from journalists having to become friendly with said journalists to get such exposure rather than having to produce quality games. - Alternatively, they must add anvilicious morals (without subtlety) that the journalists agree with so the journalists will decide to signal boost them, again regardless of quality. - I care that the journalists, who already breached my trust when it comes to scoring AAA games, also breached my trust when it comes to independent games making them entirely worthless to me until they change their ways. - I care that due to the lack of quality of high rated indie games that the "brand" of "indie" has been irrepairably damaged, pushing the average consumer back to AAA titles and removing sources of income from indie developers who release great games. - Independent games that win prestigious prizes to do so based on quality and not due to a racketeering scheme involving the judges of said prizes having invested in the winner. - I care that games journalism at large has ignored that scandal based on being friendly with the developers. - I care that games journalism at large has launched a counterattack against the enthousiast press on youtube based on the supposed scandal of YouTubers taking brand deals and not disclosing them, when the vast majority of YouTubers has either disclosed these brand deals or refused to take them and had already condemned the game developers offering these brand deals, simply because the enthousiast press has been a vocal supporter of the GamerGate movement and they wanted to discredit them. - I care that games journalism, instead of acknowledging people like me who have legitimate problems with the way they work, instead have focused on discrediting me and signal boosting trolls, making those trolls as famous as they want to be and encouraging them through hot air condemnations while clearly naming the victims, painting huge targets on their heads in the process. - I care that a majority of thse games journalists have taken the stance that they cannot discuss something while harassment happens, handily giving horrific trolls the power over what can and cannot be discussed. - I care that these journalists show the highest hypocrisy when they call gamers "entitled" and then make the argument that minorities are entitled to have more games cater to them. I want more diverse games, but you can't promote and decry entitlement at the same time. - I care that some of these games journalists have decided to condemn me and brand me a misogynist, a manbaby, and imply that I am actively involved in harassment, simply because I have concerns that some jerks have hidden behind so they can harass people in the flimsiest excuse for guilt be association that has ever existed since "you eat bread, Nazis ate bread too!" - I care that these journalists have actually done nothing to promote diversity in games but rather harmed it severely with their rampant accusations of sexism, racism and homophobia simply for their own personal dislike of a character rather than actual morally objectionale grounds having convinced game developers that adding diverse characters is not worth the hassle of dealing with these people for. - I care that a couple of women being harassed is being used to drive women away from the industry because they should fear a "boys club", thereby seriously harming the chances that the gender gap will be solved. - I find the highest shame should be in complaining about a gender gap for game developers when 22% of game developers are female, but 8% of the GameJournoPros list is female. Boys club indeed. - I care that these journalists who have harmed diversity in games as well the credibility of anyone striving for diversity in games have branded me and my culture "misogynist" when I and my gamer friends have done more to promote and defend diversity in gaming than they ever will. - I care that these journalists pretend to be the pinnacle of integrity while at the same time condeming charities for taking money from sources they don't approve of. It takes a level of cynicism that even I'm not comfortable with to do that. - I care that games journalism as a whole is happy to take money to give GTA an amazing grade yet continue to pretend they are promoting diversity in games and condeming only those that don't give them money. - I care that these journalists can condemn a game about female empowerment like Bayonetta yet sing the praises of a game like Dear Esther, which literally runs on misogynist tropes. - I care that these journalists have stopped being consumer advocates and instead have appointed themselves as Moral Guardians who control what is being made and have taken it upon themselves to, in an example that was recently posted, declare that games taking place in the holocaust are off-limits regardless of quality or intent and dogpiled developers who wish to make the attempt thereby limited both artistic freedom and gaming as an artform in general. If these guys were movie critics, Shindler's List would never have been made. - I care that these journalists have done so while claiming with a straight face that I, as the consumer, is what holds gaming back as an artform. - I care that these journalists consistently signal boost poorly researched, half baked, morally outraged false academic attacks on video game culture as facts and so devaluing actual academic discussion. I'm perfectly willing to discuss sexism in games, in fact, I've been doing so for years. I don't need nonsense like Feminist Frequency to make it harder for me by being absolutely ridiculous, stupid and filled with flat-out lies. - I care that these corrupt, dumb, morally bankrupt simpletons have had power in the past over, for example, how much money Obsidian made from Fallout: New Vegas because they inform the metacritic scores that affected Obsidian's payment and I will not stop until they have proven they are worthy of this power or are replaced. To be blunt, I care quite a lot about social justice issues and I find "SJWs" can play all the games they want, but I don't approve of two-faced journalists maliciously harming social justice issues for clickbait or to feel good about themselves for being "progressive people who condemn (read: signal boost) harassment" and I definitely don't approve of this ridiculous idea that video game critics are not supposed to be consumer advocates but culture critics. I'll listen to actual academics for that, not glorified game bloggers with zero credentials or intelligent thoughts on the matter of ethics, whose only opinion that matters is the little percentage they add to a metacritic rating. I want more diversity in gaming, I have in the past written countless e-mails to developers to ask them if they could try and moderate their communites better and try to combat toxicity on the internet and it's one of the reasons I've become a game developer. I support women in gaming, I support diverse representation in gaming, but I do not support calls for tokenism and I definitely do not support shaming consumers simply for the "crime" of being the people that studios cater to. If that makes me transparent, or a manbaby, so be it. I don't actually play enough games myself anymore for it to be an idea of "them coming to taek away me gaemz", though. I just feel that the only moral option in supporting diversity, artistic freedom and consumer rights is to support GamerGate.

I'm not sure where he said any of that. The only thing his claim comes down to is that those guys won't carry more weight than any other consumer.

I suppose I could use my status as someone who suffered from clinical depression, but I'm pretty sure everyone would claim I self-diagnosed it. I've heard anti-GGers throw that around against Boogie's PTSD from having been abused by an alcoholic mother since childhood. There's nothing these people won't use. At this point, GG only has misogynists giving them a bad name, the opponents have literally everything else in the book. I wonder who is looking worse. If they truly believe in guilt by association, they should be joining GG pretty swiftly. TotalBiscuit speaks truth on the matter of sides, trolls and media coverage: http://blueplz.blogspot.nl/2014/10/whose-side-am-i-on.html My favourite bit (because it's what I've been saying all along):

Not really, they haven't covered a lot of things. Phil Fish and Polytron's involvement with the Indiefensible scandal is now under investigation, but no major media site has actually mentioned it. Nope, it's about harassment.

YOU POOR THING, YOU'VE BEEN RUN FROM YOUR HOME BY AN ANGRY MOB OF THREE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T ACTIVELY ATTEMPTING TO BREACH YOUR HOME! Surely you must be in need of donations to help you get through these troublesome times. I'd set up a patreon account but I'm not a minority so there'd be no takers. But my point was you don't even have to be a public figure in this debate to get harassed by trolls if you've taken a stance or said anything that can be consider pro-GG. GGers attack public figures, anti-GGers attack everyone. It's like Kazerad pointed out in his journal, GG is a movement focused on personal accountability and is focused on people, and those hardlining against it are focused on grouping and stereotyping.

I've gotten three #GamerGate related death threats on Twitter and my tweet involvement was pretty much mostly retweeting stuff Boogie and TotalBiscuit said and asking people how exactly they expected GamerGaters to police anonymous trolls any better than they could.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/10/24/on-the-problem-of-harassment http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/editorials/12222-Why-I-Still-Call-Myself-a-Gamer-During-Gamergate Couple of neutral articles.

If that is her delusion, then yes, gamers are not her audience anymore. I'm not sure who is, because even film critics who look at movies as cultural objects still put scores on them. That is literally what they have any audience for. That is why they are allowed to make a living by consumers. Also, damn, new thread already? The other one didn't last a week. What is this, number six?

You lousy Texan!