BruceVC

Nonek ...no offense but I am not sure if you understand my question. If you don't mind I just want confirmation from someone else that points 4 & 5 are indeed examples of a GG victory...I just don't see it?

Numerous publications have changed or implemented new ethics policies - Okay well if you consider this a victory, I never had an issue with this , individuals such as Ms Alexander, Mr Kuchera, Mr Chipman etcetera have been shown the door for their blatant contempt for the custome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_Alexander_(journalist) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Kuchera They seem fine to me? the twelve gamers are dead articles are now being frantically back pedalled from and their message desperately denied by the indoctrinated Yeah this was silly but I said you guys misunderstood this , the ridiculous accusation that the men and women of Gamergate are all misogynists and racists is becoming laughable, No this isn't true I agree and all this when the media have been spinning a proven false dialogue that Gamergate is a harassment campaign. Once again this is not an absolute and also false. I agree So to be honest I only see point 1 as valid ? The last two are just silly generalizations that were unnecessary and you shouldn't have worried about 1. So this is one fact I have made. 2. They were both removed from their previous positions, another fact. 3. The articles were published and are now being backpedalled from, another fact. 4. So you agree, another fact. 5. You agree again, another fact. All five of my claims were true, all five of yours were false. You have lied five times now, produced no facts and conceded that I have five times. Now please provide evidence that I am a liar and pursuing a false agenda as you stated, or apologise and deny that you are interested in providing any facts. This is not about facts in the general sense ..this is suppose to be about examples of GG victory ? How can you see 4 & 5 as examples? You are not taking this debate seriously

Numerous publications have changed or implemented new ethics policies - Okay well if you consider this a victory, I never had an issue with this , individuals such as Ms Alexander, Mr Kuchera, Mr Chipman etcetera have been shown the door for their blatant contempt for the custome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_Alexander_(journalist) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Kuchera They seem fine to me? the twelve gamers are dead articles are now being frantically back pedalled from and their message desperately denied by the indoctrinated Yeah this was silly but I said you guys misunderstood this , the ridiculous accusation that the men and women of Gamergate are all misogynists and racists is becoming laughable, No this isn't true I agree and all this when the media have been spinning a proven false dialogue that Gamergate is a harassment campaign. Once again this is not an absolute and also false. I agree So to be honest I only see point 1 as valid ? The last two are just silly generalizations that were unnecessary and you shouldn't have worried about

I read this post and yet I still can't determine one example of " GG victory " . Once again Nonek drop the grandstanding and post some facts ? Anita and her kind are still active, certain websites still push SJ issues, companies like Bioware have embraced progressive change, E3 had all these token female developers and companies like Obsidian are concerned with the views of the LGBT community These are all " victories " to me...you see I post facts. Please do the same if you want to convince people of the GG victory I posted facts, you do not as I shall demonstrate: 1. Mr McIntosh's sock puppet is a laughing stock whose cause that games cause violence and sexism has been disproven. 2. Certain websites still pushing SJF issues does not invalidate the victories of Gamergate when those websites have had to implement ethics policies. 3. Bioware are doing what Origin did twenty plus years ago they have embraced regressive change. 4. E3 had less female representation this year than the last. 5. Obsidian are interested in making a profit, which has nothing to do with the struggle for ethics that Gamergate works for, their audience is their own business. Now please disprove the facts that I posted above, respond to my earlier question and prove that I am a liar and pursuing a false agenda as you stated, and for Gods sake read a dictionary and look up grandstanding, you are the one doing that not I. If you cannot do this and provide factual evidence then please stop responding to my posts, as I do not wish to hear the same condescending rhetoric repeated again and again. Nonek I was wondering when you were going to stop ignoring me...I admit I missed our chats and even the insults from you I am going to try very hard to answer your questions but sometimes I can't due to time restraints and the fact we were asked to not hijack the thread which was exactly why I didn't respond to you last time. So don't become too hangup when I can't respond, sometimes there are valid reasons. I need to research your points ....I would prefer not to but I will if you insist in the interests of proper forum etiquette ?

You funny, yes I would miss you You are very interesting person and you often misunderstood

What? Is this September 2014? This ride will never end. Seriously what is the end goal? There is something I must concede that I didn't want to develop. GG has created something meaningful..there is now a block of very connected and committed people who are opposed to SJ campaigns on different levels. It consists of mostly white, male gamers and they have some valid concerns and have a logical reason to exist I obviously won't judge my own race for making a misplaced stand so I am not opposed to them as much as people think Why does it need to have an end goal? It is pretty much born out of concern and a love for the industry and games, they want gaming to be better and not just SJ propaganda. If the SJ movement in gaming dies down then they the GG people will die down as well, or at least until the next outrage. They act as a consumers watch, which has banded together borne out of necessity since the journalists tend to be either on the side of publishers or ideologically inclined to causes not everyone shares. It will die down but I don't there will be a clear end. Ah finally a really relevant question...you ask " why does it have to have an end goal " Sorry to sound critical but I am going to be honest. I respect you see GG as a consumers watch and you really believe in this but the whole movement just seems nebulous around tangible objectives. Real objectives makes it easier to convince people about your narrative...and you do have valid concerns that could be positioned better. So ask yourself what your real goals are that gives you purpose and direction. Us SJW have this, that is what makes our views unequivocal and easier to explain I mean imagine meeting someone at a bar and trying to explain what GG is about ? GG has had short term goals which they have termed operations, that link to the larger goal of ethics in game journalism and (disavowedly) fighting SJ menace. Orog you are reasonable person so do you see what I mean. I gave you time to think about it and thats all you could think of ? Don't you see the issue...it lacks real substance. Its like you saying " oh well our goal is to fight SJW when it suits us " ?

To say your example of a GG victory is " I'm a gamer, still alive, playing violent games with B00BIES. That is PURE GG VICTORY " just seems like a very low bar to set yourself? Think about it and post something more significant, I'm actually trying to help you

I read this post and yet I still can't determine one example of " GG victory " . Once again Nonek drop the grandstanding and post some facts ? Anita and her kind are still active, certain websites still push SJ issues, companies like Bioware have embraced progressive change, E3 had all these token female developers and companies like Obsidian are concerned with the views of the LGBT community These are all " victories " to me...you see I post facts. Please do the same if you want to convince people of the GG victory

What? Is this September 2014? This ride will never end. Seriously what is the end goal? There is something I must concede that I didn't want to develop. GG has created something meaningful..there is now a block of very connected and committed people who are opposed to SJ campaigns on different levels. It consists of mostly white, male gamers and they have some valid concerns and have a logical reason to exist I obviously won't judge my own race for making a misplaced stand so I am not opposed to them as much as people think Why does it need to have an end goal? It is pretty much born out of concern and a love for the industry and games, they want gaming to be better and not just SJ propaganda. If the SJ movement in gaming dies down then they the GG people will die down as well, or at least until the next outrage. They act as a consumers watch, which has banded together borne out of necessity since the journalists tend to be either on the side of publishers or ideologically inclined to causes not everyone shares. It will die down but I don't there will be a clear end. Ah finally a really relevant question...you ask " why does it have to have an end goal " Sorry to sound critical but I am going to be honest. I respect you see GG as a consumers watch and you really believe in this but the whole movement just seems nebulous around tangible objectives. Real objectives makes it easier to convince people about your narrative...and you do have valid concerns that could be positioned better. So ask yourself what your real goals are that gives you purpose and direction. Us SJW have this, that is what makes our views unequivocal and easier to explain I mean imagine meeting someone at a bar and trying to explain what GG is about ?

At the start of this whole thing, I was mildly in support of GG: I agreed with a lot of their stated ideals (though not all), but I didn't particularly want to be associated with them due to reputation issues: more specifically, the louder more fringe (in my opinion) elements, but as well as the problem of needless polarization and demonization (again, in my opinion) between the different factions that I felt was at least partly borne out of what I felt was a combination of both ignorance and obtuseness on both sides. I just did not want to be a part of it regardless of which side I more closely aligned with. There was also the fact that I view the gaming industry as a bit of a lost cause for a variety reasons at this point anyways (and not limited just to GG's stances, I might add: I take at least few from opposing viewpoints, too, though I may have somewhat different thoughts on them...but that's true for GG's stances, too). Nowadays, even though my opinions in this regard haven't much changed, I feel more strongly aligned with GG than before - even though I sometimes still disagree with some of the methods and ideas employed by the movement, I disagree even more with some of what I consider to be the lunacy of the anti-GG. I am still, however, not actually associating with them, though. However...I find it ironic that you're the one asking me this, Bruce, because you're at least partly to blame for that: when somebody mentions "anti-GG", I can't but help think of you as being my sort of mental "representation" for their ideas and ideals and arguments...and your posts on this subject as well as in other political topics are genuinely so infuriating to me (yes, yours specifically: no-one else in these topics that I disagree with - even those I chronically disagree with - has ever gotten even half as bothersome to me so far), that the anti-GG side seems almost anathematic to me at this point. I don't mean this to devolve into a personal attack, particularly because you seem like a mostly genuinely pleasant person outside of these topics (and also you seem to attempt to be pleasant even inside of them, although it mostly seems to have the opposite effect on me)...but every time I enter one of these topics and I see posts like your latest ones in this topic (not necessarily the ones in reply to Amentep - besides the "degrade" one - or the one to aluminiumtrioxid, but the oh-so-condescending ones before in reply to Meshuggah and Orogun), I can't help but consider putting you on my ignore list because I know that there's no way that I can discuss with you in a acceptable manner (in regards to the rules and basic politeness) without at least reverting to extreme passive-aggressiveness...which is still not acceptable to me, seeing as I'm very often not correct/100% on the mark all of the time, which, combined with me likely sounding like a jerk to you and everyone else, is not something I really want to be engaging with. It's also not very healthy/satisfactory for me, either. Again, sorry if this seems mean and overly personal: I really don't mean to be, and I'm trying to make it as polite as possible while still being honest: you just drive me crazy in these sorts of topics, Bruce. I also recognize that this is purely a personal problem. Anyone who wants to criticize me in turn, feel free to take a shot so I can feel better about this post. Alternatively, you can deny me that and make me extra feel like a jerk. It's up to you, readers. (edit): Also, this took me literally like 45 minutes to write out. Don't say I didn't try my best, at the very least. Barti !! Stop being a bad boy I very very seldom take anything personally, so please I prefer your brutal honesty. I really don't mind because I have to be honest I feel I am right about all the points I make. I don't mind that most of you guys disagree with me....that doesn't change the fact what I say is true and if you understood it you would be a much more fulfilled and relaxed person as things would make sense (of course sometimes I am wrong and then I generally admit it ) But I can't force you to see things from my perspective so I just hope you come around on your own but if not I will continue to raise important and different views from what most of you believe about this whole GG fiasco

Sorry, wasn't meaning to make you feel bad; I did think supporting the publication of Hogan having sex in private with another man's wife because adultry was immoral was dispicable. Neither Hogan or the other man's wife really "deserved" their intimate moments to be posted to the internet. You did make me feel bad but I don't blame you....you played the guilt card marked with fact. There is a difference between Zoe Quinn who was a no name, diffident , depressed programmer having an affair with some equally no name " gaming journalist " and Hogan the super-celebrity sleeping with his friends wife...yet they are also similar so I had to concede I was wrong

Not if one of the groups is wearing hazmat suits. The hazmat suits would get dirty. And in taking them off the people inside might get dirty. And the person who cleans them might get dirty. And the person inside might get dirty if the suit isn't properly sealed... ...what was my point again? The hazmat suit wearers can wipe each other down before taking off their hazmat suits. Crisis averted. (edit): Except for those not wearing the hazmat suits. They're still dirty. Barti darling who do you support ..GG or anti-GG And before you answer please make the decision based on the overall state of this whole furor and not what you think people on this forum want you to say

What? Is this September 2014? This ride will never end. Seriously what is the end goal? There is something I must concede that I didn't want to develop. GG has created something meaningful..there is now a block of very connected and committed people who are opposed to SJ campaigns on different levels. It consists of mostly white, male gamers and they have some valid concerns and have a logical reason to exist I obviously won't judge my own race for making a misplaced stand so I am not opposed to them as much as people think

...How exactly are you expecting any good-faith discussion to ensue when you're literally incapable of not assuming the worst of the people sitting on the other side of the table? I don't think either side is capable of not assuming the worst of the people across the table. That's how "ethics in journalism" and "anti-harassment" and "better/more positive/more inclusive representation" and "disclosure of areas of potential bias in news articles" end up being opposing concepts (when there's nothing inherent in one that precludes the others other than the sides have drawn their lines in the sand). Lets not degrade both sides to the lowest closest denominator...GG is still worse than anti-GG at the end of the day if you look at everything that occurred ? When two groups fight in the mud, don't both get dirty? You cute with your diplomacy that builds at times to irrefutable logic....but not when I''m on the receiving end like when you called me despicable about the Hogan incident....it was true that's what bothered me and my code made it mandatory to accept I was wrong I can easily dispute emotion and invective....in fact I thrive on it but not hard facts

that is simply false and have been tried times and times again, especially by those that want GG to die. What is false? That if the Ethics Brigade had re-organized themselves under a different hashtag, it probably would have been harder to paint them as harrassers? I have a hard time accepting "this is false because reasons" as an answer, especially since the method hasn't been tried, therefore the conviction that it is, indeed, false, seems misplaced. "Maybe it would have worked but it's been decided that it's a slim chance, and comes with associated risks we're not willing to take" sounds vaguely more honest and less like outright accusing the other party of having ulterior motives is all I'm saying. What. I mean, "divide" I get, but how exactly can you get "conquered"? It's not like the group's been represented in a manner members saw as "fair" by media outlets that aren't manned by opportunistic ****bags (looking at you, Milo). Worst case scenario, instead of an amorphous blob that prides itself on being incoherent, you'd get two amorphous blobs, working ostensibly for the same goal, hopefully with a little less harrassment from one blob. ...How exactly are you expecting any good-faith discussion to ensue when you're literally incapable of not assuming the worst of the people sitting on the other side of the table? ...I'm shocked, shocked to discover that a splinter group centered solely on mockery instead of meaningful dialogue and an exploration of issues in journalistic integrity has failed to become a baggage-free bastion of enlightened discourse regarding ethics. You don't see a splinter-group as weakening GG? Weeding out the "bad" elements? Maybe a leader or group deciding what should be in or not? Kicking Milo because people do not like him? No dividing? lol, you're not even trying. GG has its cause(s) and that's it. Its existence should not, and will not be dependent on the approval of those that hate it. Oh, i did forget one thing, there is meaningful dialogue with the Society of Professional Journalists already: Meshugger I understand why you are trying to defend GG...you may actually believe it but please trust me its misplaced You have made your point about things that annoyed you like the Alexander article and even won some battles but now its time to move on..what do you gain by this "GG has its causes " ...do you even have an end goal?

...How exactly are you expecting any good-faith discussion to ensue when you're literally incapable of not assuming the worst of the people sitting on the other side of the table? I don't think either side is capable of not assuming the worst of the people across the table. That's how "ethics in journalism" and "anti-harassment" and "better/more positive/more inclusive representation" and "disclosure of areas of potential bias in news articles" end up being opposing concepts (when there's nothing inherent in one that precludes the others other than the sides have drawn their lines in the sand). Lets not degrade both sides to the lowest closest denominator...GG is still worse than anti-GG at the end of the day if you look at everything that occurred ?

It's very kind of you to say that, but I'm afraid that's not true, and claiming such isn't really doing the quality of the debate any favors. Sorry but I didn't say that to flatter you. I never do that, but its true. There will always be someone who is clever than you in a debate but knowing that actually helps you work out how to engage with them properly

In all fairness, if the people who have been serious about having a discussion regarding ethics had ditched the "gamergater" label at the point when it became irrevocably associated with harrassment, their opposition would probably have had a harder time making the "ethics is just a smokescreen" charge stick. He who lies down with pigs, etcetera etcetera. Sorry i have to butt in here, but that is simply false and have been tried times and times again, especially by those that want GG to die. Not only it's a classic divide & conquer method, it puts the acceptance of new group A in the hand of those that originally hated GG to begin with. There will be always the fallback-argument of "toxic foundations" and so on, so no. Besides it was even an experiment to do so (see http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/gamergate#pizzagate) which pretty much went as expected. Nah he is right, I know you guys don't like to hear this but there never was a way to win. The movement was corrupted right in the beginning you just didn't realize it. Its not anyone's fault, lets be honest I know most of you guys mean well but to get onto mainstream media as a " sexist and abusive " organisation you have to realize how utterly outclassed you were due to the support people like Anita will always receive Don't see it as a victory or loss...see is something you believed in and supported. No shame in having conviction in something

Yes that's right, that is what DIY means So I thought that's what you did for fun...you know like renovate the bathroom for fun instead of reading ?

Gfted1 do you read...I thought you did DIY only ?

You know you social justice type really like being **** contrary to your belief that everyone should be good. The original point was about the disparity in how despite both groups being very similar there is only one that has been demonized. As for which site, first it was 4chan /v/ and /pol/ boards and more recently a series of subreddits following an attempt to clean up their image not because of any illegal actions in those places. So you're saying that you only know half the story and won't believe the other side. Glad to know where you stand, that way I can pretty safely assume that this conversation is pointless as you won't accept any other viewpoint. After all, you believe you know. Orog you guys always make me laugh when you end up having debates with Alum....and you know why ? They always generally end the same way, Alum is basically smarter than the rest of us, I know that annoys certain people but its true. That's not to say he is never wrong but its not like having a debate with me..he is very analytical and you cannot " win " unless you are certain of facts and lets be honest most of our discussions are not about facts but more based on emotion

Freudian slip? Anyway, it wasn't saying something about SJ that got him made fun of. It was his gleeful statement that he didn't know anything about things that someone who claims to be a video game journalist should know about. I think that he could have gotten away with not knowing about these thing but it was the dismissive tone with which he said it. For a lot of people games are a passion and a labor of love, it kind of ****s on them when people undermine them. Look lets be honest here, Moosa in this case is simply a causality of the " GG vs SJW war " that rages seemingly interminably on several forums and websites I see intransigence on both sides and strange and irrational reactions from people. For example why do you guys get irate about articles on sites like Polygon? You don't even like them and generally treat what they say with contempt..yet what they say bothers you ? I don't get it? And people like Moosa seem tasked to just find any SJ inconsistency and lambaste the game, it can be frustrating ....of course this is going to annoy people and as I mentioned he must be prepared to face criticism It's a matter of direction, both sides seem to want the games industry to turn into different things while both are distrustful of each other's intentions. That said, I can't think of an industry that would tolerate a worker that blatantly proclaims to not care about the subject of their work...Maybe the fast food industry. What makes you think that they are tasked with finding SJ inconsistencies? The're games journalists, not social justice journalist and not culture critics. So why would it be their job to make sure that a game is politically correct? Well unfortunately for some people this whole thing has gone too far...now some people are defined by there ideological views and the core subject seems to sometime get lost So take Moosa and his article of W3, he lambasted the game on the lack of racial integration....the actual game gets lost in all the diatribe. If I was Moosa I would have considered where CDPR comes from and the previous Witcher games and then considered if this type of criticism was necessary. Its pushing USA values and expectations to Poland...probably not the right time to do it. Its like the call to remove Hookers from GTAV, its well meaning but utterly misplaced and inconsistent And more importantly it just adds more to the pointless " divide " between gaming journalists and the GG crowd Your post brings hope to my heart and a tear to my eye...which is starting to hurt; you know, like when you haven't used your tear ducts in a while and it just hurts when you do. I have spent some time understanding where the SJ movement in the gaming industry is perhaps making mistakes and exacerbating the problem and divide

Freudian slip? Anyway, it wasn't saying something about SJ that got him made fun of. It was his gleeful statement that he didn't know anything about things that someone who claims to be a video game journalist should know about. I think that he could have gotten away with not knowing about these thing but it was the dismissive tone with which he said it. For a lot of people games are a passion and a labor of love, it kind of ****s on them when people undermine them. Look lets be honest here, Moosa in this case is simply a causality of the " GG vs SJW war " that rages seemingly interminably on several forums and websites I see intransigence on both sides and strange and irrational reactions from people. For example why do you guys get irate about articles on sites like Polygon? You don't even like them and generally treat what they say with contempt..yet what they say bothers you ? I don't get it? And people like Moosa seem tasked to just find any SJ inconsistency and lambaste the game, it can be frustrating ....of course this is going to annoy people and as I mentioned he must be prepared to face criticism It's a matter of direction, both sides seem to want the games industry to turn into different things while both are distrustful of each other's intentions. That said, I can't think of an industry that would tolerate a worker that blatantly proclaims to not care about the subject of their work...Maybe the fast food industry. What makes you think that they are tasked with finding SJ inconsistencies? The're games journalists, not social justice journalist and not culture critics. So why would it be their job to make sure that a game is politically correct? Well unfortunately for some people this whole thing has gone too far...now some people are defined by there ideological views and the core subject seems to sometime get lost So take Moosa and his article of W3, he lambasted the game on the lack of racial integration....the actual game gets lost in all the diatribe. If I was Moosa I would have considered where CDPR comes from and the previous Witcher games and then considered if this type of criticism was necessary. Its pushing USA values and expectations to Poland...probably not the right time to do it. Its like the call to remove Hookers from GTAV, its well meaning but utterly misplaced and inconsistent And more importantly it just adds more to the pointless " divide " between gaming journalists and the GG crowd

Yeah on my trips to Vegas we have done things like shooting guns, trips to the grand canyon, helicopter rides, strip club visits ( a must ) watching the numerous live performances like Cirque du Soleil, magician acts , shopping, visiting the cheese shops and of course gambling

Because so far they haven't really shown that they can handle a project of that size. Sure, I could say they haven't been given a chance really but if they have battled this much with EE you right its probably not a good bet to think they could deliver on such a massive undertaking like BG3