Blarghagh

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.

What part crushed GamerGate? The part where she literally came out and said "yes there are ethics problems in the game industry and I've been talking about it on my show for years" to completely validate the entire thing?

Let's be progressive about polarizing and demonizing.

How did they get a massive following when no other MRA movement or whatever has ever been able to muster more than a smattering of dumbasses?

This hits close to the heart of the matter. I do community management for a small developer part-time, so I talk to indie devs all the time. A lot of them are pissed, because when it comes to exposure making a great game doesn't seem to matter anymore. If you want to get exposure, which is pretty much everything for a game developer unless you're so good or unique that word of mouth builds by itself, you rely on contests and journalists. Now it turns out the contests are rigged and the journalists favour the lame indie clique that they're overly chummy with even though those people barely make games. These devs aren't saying anything because they rely on these websites and they don't want to jump into the minefield or get blacklisted, but they're invested in making sure these guys go down.

Boycotting campaigns are fine. I'm referring to the #GamerGaters who attempt to dig up "dirt" on people who spoke out against #GamerGate (by pointlessly sifting through dating profiles and such, not by looking for money trails or things done wrong) but haven't really done anything else wrong to warrant such attention.

I read through his most infamous pieces, his GamerGate article and his article on Rape as a Story Element, and though I disagree with his views (some of them quite vehemently) I'm not exactly sure how he's sexist based on those. Can you give me an example, alum? I'm not too familiar with the man. This was about James Desborough, to clarify. I didn't see your edit. Milo I have no objections to, he's a douche. Yeah, I know some people tried to talk. Not sure if them not listening justifies witch-hunts rather than trying to talk again. I do agree with your point about inclusion. Inclusion is important, but tokenism is bad. For true inclusion, if there is such a thing (I don't believe there can be with the current "progressive" climate of victimhood*), it can't be a binary switch. BioWare is particularely guilty of this with some of their romance options where a character becomes defined by who the player is instead of that character being a true minority representation. That's not inclusion, that's pandering. It's gamey and disingenuous. If you have a minority representation, it better ****ing matter. Otherwise it's just giving the same supposedly "misogynist" characters boobs or a tan and calling yourself progressive. *Two reasons: Developers are currently, overwhelmingly cis men and they cannot accurately portray a minority perspective even if they wanted to because they simply do not possess it. "Check your privelege" indeed. This one can be fixed. What can't be fixed is that nobody will ever be happy. Female character is too feminine, it's sexist. Female character is too strong, she's been masculated, it's sexist. Female character conforms to negatively perceived gender role, it's sexist. Female character doesn't conform to positively perceived gender role, it's sexist. Female character gets sexualised, it's sexist. Female character is modest and so subverts female sexual empowerment, it's sexist. Other characters acknowledge female character is female defining her by her gender, it's sexist. Other characters don't point out female character is female ignoring her identity, it's sexist. At this point, I'm beginning to wonder if it's even worth bothering which is literally the saddest thing ever.

I actually have one of them but I never got around to read it and now that there's a show the "book is always better" syndrome convinced me to let it lie - if I read it now, the show's just going to disappoint but if I read it after, I can enjoy the show and might still enjoy the book. Maximizing enjoyment! Hm. I have a lot of books I haven't read yet, I should get on that.

Gee, I sure wish people would pick education over condemnation for once. I'm just so genuinely sick of both sides pointing fingers. - I wish these games journalists, instead of saying "gamers are dead", would ask the question "gee, a significant vocal part of the gamer audience feels alienated from society and women - I wonder how we can fix this". - I wish #GamerGate would focus on "gosh, I feel games media is preachy and untrustworthy, let's see if we can talk to them about how to fix this" instead of going "let's conduct a witch hunt to find dirt on all people we already decided to dislike!" - I wish those "#GamerGate is a hate group" articles who so often like to claim "there are good people there, but they've been duped" would stop to think about why exactly it was so easy to dupe those good people and if the reasons they hooked on to #GamerGate for could have validity. Even if it were true that #GamerGate was a hate group, dismissing the ethics argument because "it's just a front for misogyny" would still be illogical. I think the implication that that all these people got hooked into it over total lies because they're just stupid says a lot more about the inherent denial and polarisation in the world view of the person who believes that than it does about the people who got "roped into it". - I wish someone would realize that the reason those gamers reacted so violently against this is that they already didn't trust gaming media and that they have been on the defensive against people calling their hobby evil for decades. - I wish someone other than Erik Kain would point out that no MRA movement has ever been able to get a significant grassroots following, astroturfing be damned. Even if you're going to stick to the argument "it's a hate group", you better ask yourself "why does this one have a much bigger following"? - I wish the media would realize that the "media censorship and corruption is a myth" claim can only be credibly made if you're willing to actually discuss those allegations instead of flat-out ignoring them and that doing so directly plays into the narrative of the group they decry. Really, one of the biggest reasons I still lean pro-#GamerGate despite the entrenchment is that most of the media figures who are asking these critical questions are on the side of #GamerGate. People like TotalBiscuit, Boogie, Janelle Bonnano, Christina Sommers, Erik Kain. What media figures against GamerGate have asked any of these questions? Just pinning your Moral Superiority Merit Badge on to go "look at how progressive I am when I dismiss other human beings entirely" will never be helpful and is at best pointless (Jezebel) or at worst willfully malicious (T.C. Sottek).

Yeah, I was actually being sarcastic. I remember very clearly the pain of root canal without anaesthesia, but I don't recall the chair. My solution to getting through it was to type out what I was feeling in a clinical manner on a nonexistent keyboard. The dentist's pretty assistant kept looking at my fingers wondering what I was doing, which was fairly entertaining.

#notallgamers

I think this one will end up having more replay value, however. I did a second playthrough of Amnesia and it was rather uneventful because it's so scripted and the enemies are so dumb. The alien is actually pretty smart. That's what I gather from the videos I watched anyway. It's a bit too pricey for me at the moment.

I had root canal sans anaesthesia once. Even through all that, the chair still bothered me.

Femfreq just tweeted that GamerGate is just a new name for the same group that's been harassing her for years. Huh, I very clearly remember defending her back then. Weird. Either way, that's some freaking ego to say it's all about you when most of the movement refers to you as "Literally Who 2".

Can someone explain to me what the big deal about privelege is? I mean I get looking at group statistics and seeing one group is generally more priveleged but what do statistics mean to the individual? It's not a concept that can be applied to everyone nor should it be because it defines someone by race, gender, orientation instead of who they are.

I think Moviebob's parents were killed by a gamer or something. Either way, best not to give attention to psycho trolls. I mean, if GamerGate gets to say "hey we're fundamentally good, trolls don't represent us" then so does GamerGate's opposition. And make no mistake, the fact that he has a show on the Escapist doesn't make Moviebob anything else than a psycho troll. Like I've said before, it's the people willing to stay calm and talk that are coming out of this with any kind of dignity. In a few years, Moviebob won't even be a blip on anyone's radar.

So... when someone quotes something that vaguely applies but was said about grander things, you must condemn a group of people for having someone that was dumb enough to quote it? Great. You have to be against the human race. Remember when Bill Hicks freaked about someone in his audience yelling "Free Bird"? That's how I'm starting to feel now.

Yeah, but it still felt like it was slowly building up a season climax, and that didn't really come.

You are correct, they attribute it to GamerGate. And they repeat it in approval, co-opting the sentiment for the other side.

So The Guardian says that dealing with GamerGate there can be no neutral stance - you have to be against GamerGate. Yeah, go right ahead and advocate more fighting and harassment, more entrenchment and baiting, more polarisation! The guy who wrote that is just as bad as the guy who harassed Brianna Wu. If I see one more bull**** article like this, I think I'm going to freak. Somehow, GamerGate is the bad guy here, while these guys are the ones actively, openly, publicly telling people to persecute other people.

Hold on, last weeks episode of the Strain was the season finale? That makes it somewhat more disappointing. I thought we were still in the build-up.

Helpful.