Blarghagh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZqb_9qnXKM#t=67 Just going to leave this here and go break my guitar now.

Now I kinda feel like I missed out because I never heard of it.

There are groups dedicated to trolling? D:

What's GNAA? I didn't expect them to be less overt, if anything I expected them to be more overt. Most media will not call them on their ****, no matter what his low they sink. You are very much right. There are a lot of lazy journalists out there. I found an article in a Dutch newspaper, one which normally rarely ever covers anything to do with games, decrying the terrible abuse suffered by women at the hands of the conservative angry white males known as GamerGate. The journalist who wrote it had obviously just copied everything from the Forbes article without doing any sort of research of his own into the subject. And I imagine this sort of thing is spreading to local newspapers everywhere. The force of lazy journalism is strong indeed. For those who speak Dutch : http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/5595/Digitaal/article/detail/3770903/2014/10/17/Gamevrouwen-bedreigd-Bitch-ik-weet-waar-je-woont.dhtml It can't even get the basest facts right because it specifies that the attacks are against "topvrouwen" a.k.a. those who are at the top of games hierarchy. I haven't heard anything of Jade Raymond getting threatened, just some nobodies that literally nobody would know if they hadn't been threatened. EDIT: WikiLeaks on GamerGate: "The say movement is tainted, they're right. Keep going anyway."

I am not, I just thought they would be less overt about it.

Nope. Here's a collection of screen grabs that explain it far better than people whining about people on the internet. You'll note the GNAA involved in egging the harassment on. ... What the ****.

I thought this video was much more interesting, not because it's particularely good but because it made me laugh: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmYaAkL_m7E

Yeah that's another video about the state and nature of GG. I thought this guy was entitled to have his own opinion though I disagreed with it and his assessment that #GamerGate started with the Quinnspiracy harassment as the whole point of #GamerGate was for gamers to distance themselves from that harassment as their culture got mass condemned for it. (Which then got co-opted by the same nuts, so obviously they bloody bungled it.) I also disagree with the assessment that nothing good came out of GG. The revelations about IGF racketeering are pretty damn important. So yeah, let's stop ignoring facts over opinions like "it's all bad" or "it's all good".

Good luck man, if you're as good out there as you are on here you're going to knock it out of the park.

You know what my issue is with people who say you can't discuss ethics in journalism as long as harassment is happening? They are giving trolls agency and control over what can and cannot be discussed. I reject that out of hand. This filth wants to be acknowledged and I refuse to do that. I consider any statement of "come back when guys making the same argument as you stop being jerks" to be giving in to them. Boogie is being a wonderful man again, trying to get #EndTheHate trending to get the smart people on both sides to start talking. I don't know what it will do but it makes me happy that people keep trying.

I dunno, to me Ben Grimm was never about who he was *before* he got turned into the Thing, it was about him dealing with the changes. Like I said, this specific change doesn't phase me. Changing the entire origin, themes and design for no reason, that bothers me.

I don't moderate Way Off Topic, otherwise I wouldn't participate in this debate because I would recuse myself. Here's the thing, though I originally supported #GamerGate, I stopped doing so over the harassment once I determined the trolls actually identified as #GamerGate supporters, have denounced trolls and consistently fought them and very clearly distanced my problems with journalistic ethics from them and their ridiculous witch hunts. I'm not sure where I'm throwing in my lot with them. Because I care about an issue that a jerk cares about? Well, gee, a lot of jerks care about eating. I better stop doing that too. Either way, the way I see it: we can wait forever for online trolls to go away and never get anything done, or we can talk about actual issues while ignoring them. They're never going away, so your solution to them isn't so much a solution as it is an unethical and cowardly capitulation to them. A.k.a. giving them exactly what they want. So yes, use unwarranted personal attacks to prove your superiority all you want. It's not going to work. By the way, for someone who doesn't care, you surely seem to. Think about all the talking about the problems of capitalism you could have done in the meanwhile.

Journalistic ethics and harassment may usually be two completely separate things. In this context, however, they're not. Like it or not, you're throwing your lot in with the harassers, and soiling both yourself and the cause of ethics in journalism in the process. If you're not a neckbearded manchild yourself, then you're, as Lenin dubbed Western milquetoast lefties supporting, or at least not opposing, the Bolshevik revolution, a "useful idiot."

I had a few minutes to waste. That said, this thread has opened my eyes to just how many neckbearded man-children inhabit this very forum. I'm frankly shocked. I thought more of us were fully-socialized adults, more or less. I also think that if you're more upset about indie games not getting the exposure you think they deserve than lives and careers being if not ruined at least severely harmed by this stuff, you are one of those neckbearded man-children. I see. All it took was someone to disagree with you to label them as a misogynist man-child who supports harassment. Because I care about those things, I automatically care less about harassment? I can't count the amount of times I've reported harassment and gotten twitter accounts banned for it, or the amount of times I've denounced the harassment against these people even only in the threads about it on this forum. Journalist ethics and harassment are two completely seperate things and condemning one does not equal supporting to other. But you know this, all you're here for is to pretend your superior. Too bad you can't claim superiority unless you bloody well possess it. Here's a misrepresentative label for you if you're so fond of them: Considering you don't care about it, I can consider you just another online troll trying to get a rise out of people, lumping you in with the same group sending the death threats too. Since I don't have time to waste, I'm not going to bother with that kind of nonsense anymore.

I dunno, Jamie Bell has some pretty extensive motion capture experience and did a lot of training with Andy Serkis. Literally everything I learn about the new FF flick weirds me out except that.

For me personally, considering 90% of my income comes from indie game devs that I freelance for, I find the fact that they cannot get an audience regardless of quality because they aren't chummy with reviewers or forking up cash for reviews to be a pretty damn pressing concern. With all the shovelware around, you need exposure and I'm sick of good games getting passed over for dreck like Gone Home because it happens to have some kind of moral in it or seeing good games that people threw their lives into lose out to run of the mill platformers because contest judges invested in their winning game. To see those concerns sidelined because "guess what? people network" or "criticising them right now means you're a misogynist" or even "psh there's other problems in the world" is getting pretty irritating. If there's other problems you find more pressing, go bloody talk about them. Instead you wasted a couple paragraphs proving your superiority by talking about something that you don't even care about at length. Productive.

I'm going to do some deliberate strawmanning here. Like I've been telling all my football loving friends, by supporting a specific team they are associating with the football hooligans also supporting that specific team. They must condemn the following of that team before they can talk about football!

I can say with absolute certainty that if not for this harassment, I would not know who any of them are.

How is this GamerGate's work? Ultimately if you take the bait from a troll, do not be surprised when it keeps happening. TotalBiscuit did a great little speech about how if they truly want the death threats to stop, they should STOP ****ING ANNOUNCING THEM ON TWITTER TO STRANGERS ON THE INTERNET WHO CAN'T DO **** ALL TO HELP YOU. All that does is feed and acknowledge the troll, alerting them that it worked, and encourages copycat crimes. Yet they do it, and we all know damned well why. Because deep down they enjoy this coverage and they enjoy this shield of being able to say "look see! It's sexism!" I meant the situation, not the movement. You made the same point I was trying to make but in more detail. The reason people keep threatening Anita is because it's an easy way for trolls to get the attention they want because she consistently reacts exactly the way they want her to.

I find the only consistent message #GamerGate sends to actual trolls is "hey look, your trolling works, it pisses people off and stops the people you want to bother from doing their job, GO KEEP DOING IT!"

I decided to look into Brianna Wu's games (I and pretty much everyone else would never have heard of her if not for her "involvement") and found Revolution 60. It's a game about well-endowed barbie dolls, apparently.

Yiannopopoulous would not be fit to judge a dog on ethics, I'm sorry to say. He published the e-mails but that doesn't mean he isn't a biased journalist himself. The only reason he hitched his name to GG is to get publicity. Nobody cared who he was before this and his earlier views on Gamers aren't exactly kosher. Bain and Kain, Ombudsmen Extraordinaire would be awesome, however, since they have proven to be men of outstanding integrity and intelligence.

I don't know, maybe ask Gamespot how the rage impacted them when they haven't been relevant for years and why Jeff Gerstwinn's Wikipedia page is the second hit when you google them. The difference here is that back then, it was a dog eat dog world and the other publications ate them alive just as much as the gamers did. Now the damn place has cliquefied and there's just a lot of handholding and covering for your friends. I've seen this argument made before but it just doesn't hold water. Significantly larger amount of gamers raged out far, far worse than this over a reviewer standing in front of some mountain dew and doritos product placement. But nobody attacked all gamers as being responsible for those ridiculous fringe morons and nobody claimed credibility due to victimhood over it.

This would be enough for me. Ditto.

Question, have any of the prominent GG "victims" been anything other than North American? Because I was discussing this with a female dev friend and she claimed it was an American problem because she had never been anything but accepted by gamers. She didn't really qualify it because it was an offhand comment but I'm interested.