Drama in indy gaming and games journalism

[TrashMan]

I see that the online abuse that Brianna Wu received that forced her to leave her house has now got to CNN. Since the argument seems to be that the abuse is equal from both sides how many founders or major contributing members of GG have been forced to leave there homes due to abuse from the anti-GG crowd? Can you guys post the links around this

 

 

Overreaction.

 

This threats everyone keeps recieveing are hot air.

 

Think for a second who is making them? Kids, drunkard and overemotional people with hair-triggers. Most of them don't mean a thing they posted.  Most don't even live anywhere close or have the means to travel half way around the globe just to hurt some stupid person.

And most of them won't even know where said person lives.

 

So yeah, you got a bigegr chance to get hit byy a lightining while holding a big metal rod on a roof of a tall building during a thunderstorm than actually come to any real physical harm.

 

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

I see that the online abuse that Brianna Wu received that forced her to leave her house has now got to CNN. Since the argument seems to be that the abuse is equal from both sides how many founders or major contributing members of GG have been forced to leave there homes due to abuse from the anti-GG crowd? Can you guys post the links around this

http://gamergate.giz.moe/2014/09/random-gamergate-supporters-being-doxxed-and-harassed-in-real-life-at-least-one-lost-their-job/

 

And if you don't consider Twitter posts from people being harassed as valid, keep in mind that is the only proof publicly presented so far in Wu's case.

 

 

Thanks, this is an interesting link. I do consider this relevant

 

 

Sure you can easily reverse words in that quote if you want, but it wouldn't really be relevant because that's not the point the author is making

 

I see that the online abuse that Brianna Wu received that forced her to leave her house has now got to CNN. Since the argument seems to be that the abuse is equal from both sides how many founders or major contributing members of GG have been forced to leave there homes due to abuse from the anti-GG crowd? Can you guys post the links around this

 

It's the exact same point, just directed towards the other side of the story; someone with the same views as you did something bad, now shut the hell up and end all this bcrap or you can't blame people for thinking everyone with the same views/hobbies are of the same character calliber as the worst 1% of them.

 

Also, "forced to leave her house" is a BS statement, as far as I'm aware no actual attempt at harming her has been made, so your point is that is that none of our people have fleed their home when the internet started spilling into their real life in a horrible way? So you're saying those people are being less abused just because they didn't run crying like whiny little girls or abuse it to get more donations (like Zoe did)? Didn't some gamergate supporter recieve syringes and white powder in his/her mail anyhow? What about the various people who are being called up at work by random strangers trying to get them fired?

 

No I won't shut the hell up, I asked a valid question around a real issue. Several people opposed to GG have received death threats and have felt so uncomfortable about the state of there security that they left there homes, a home is suppose to be a place of safety. This has now reached CNN and was on the international news. This is a valid talking point and frankly I don't care if you and others don't think its relevant. Because it is relevant

Edited October 14, 2014 by BruceVC

[fgalkin]

 

I see that the online abuse that Brianna Wu received that forced her to leave her house has now got to CNN. Since the argument seems to be that the abuse is equal from both sides how many founders or major contributing members of GG have been forced to leave there homes due to abuse from the anti-GG crowd? Can you guys post the links around this

 

 

Overreaction.

 

This threats everyone keeps recieveing are hot air.

 

Think for a second who is making them? Kids, drunkard and overemotional people with hair-triggers. Most of them don't mean a thing they posted.  Most don't even live anywhere close or have the means to travel half way around the globe just to hurt some stupid person.

And most of them won't even know where said person lives.

 

So yeah, you got a bigegr chance to get hit byy a lightining while holding a big metal rod on a roof of a tall building during a thunderstorm than actually come to any real physical harm.

 

 

Oh, so, school and workplace shootings are not totally a thing anymore? When did that change, and why did no one tell me?

 

Have a very nice day.

-fgalkin

[Bryy]

Can't we even agree that all harassment is bad? What's wrong with these people?

Yes, it is. Both sides are doing ****ty, ****ty things. Nobody besides ****heads condone that stuff. There is no denying who started it, though, and to rally around ****heads and say "this invalidates everything they are saying" is stupid.

[Shallow]

That shut the hell up part wasn't directed at you, or anyone, it was meant as a boiling down of what the quote meant, if you removed who it was addressed to, sorry if I didn't make that clear enough, although to be fair it looks clear enough to me what I meant, sorry about causing the misunderstanding anyhow. In any event, whilst what I wrote isn't overflowing with sympathy for the ones who have fled their housing, it doesn't change the point in the second part of my post, which you didn't address at all (unlike the first part there isn't really anything to be misunderstood here, this just looks like plain ignoring it), that the exact same harrassment (along with different kinds of harrassment) has been happening to people on our side, and that just because those people haven't run crying, it doesn't make it fair for you and the media to portray the sjw/media/feminist victims as somehow being worse off just because they're reacting more severely. It's completely ridiculous to say "How many founders or major contributing members of GG have been forced to leave there homes due to abuse from the anti-GG crowd?" when no one has been fysically forced to leave their homes, when looking at how people react to nonfysically intimidation or other stuff, it's not fair to look at how they reacted when judging the ones who subjected them to said stuff, you gotta look at what happened to them, if I say the same insults to three guys, two of them ignore it, and the third bashes my teeth in, it doesn't mean I behaved worse to guy 3# than I did to 1&2, it just means 3# had a harsher reaction.

[Bryy]

That's another thing.

 

Everyone is acting like GamerGate is an organization with a staff list. 

 

It's not, it's just a few sexually frustrated guys that managed to get a completely oblivious following.

[Shallow]

Oh, so, school and workplace shootings are not totally a thing anymore? When did that change, and why did no one tell me?

 

Have a very nice day.

-fgalkin

 

Last I checked no one who committed a school or workplace shooting said it was due to those nasty feminists trying to control their video games, don't think I've heard of any where the gunman made threats about committing said acts beforehand.

[BruceVC]

That shut the hell up part wasn't directed at you, or anyone, it was meant as a boiling down of what the quote meant, if you removed who it was addressed to, sorry if I didn't make that clear enough, although to be fair it looks clear enough to me what I meant, sorry about causing the misunderstanding anyhow. In any event, whilst what I wrote isn't overflowing with sympathy for the ones who have fled their housing, it doesn't change the point in the second part of my post, which you didn't address at all (unlike the first part there isn't really anything to be misunderstood here, this just looks like plain ignoring it), that the exact same harrassment (along with different kinds of harrassment) has been happening to people on our side, and that just because those people haven't run crying, it doesn't make it fair for you and the media to portray the sjw/media/feminist victims as somehow being worse off just because they're reacting more severely. It's completely ridiculous to say "How many founders or major contributing members of GG have been forced to leave there homes due to abuse from the anti-GG crowd?" when no one has been fysically forced to leave their homes, when looking at how people react to nonfysically intimidation or other stuff, it's not fair to look at how they reacted when judging the ones who subjected them to said stuff, you gotta look at what happened to them, if I say the same insults to three guys, two of them ignore it, and the third bashes my teeth in, it doesn't mean I behaved worse to guy 3# than I did to 1&2, it just means 3# had a harsher reaction.

 

Fair enough, I apologize for assuming the " shut the hell up " was directed to me

 

I have already acknowledged that the virtual abuse is from both sides, there are extremists with there own agendas within each camp  

 

 

But my question is really  "what does civil society outside of this debate think is more serious or is worse abuse"

 

If you look at the link that was posted

http://www.businessinsider.com/gamergate-death-threats-2014-10

 

This is a business website and then add to that the CNN coverage I would say the GG camp should be more concerned about the perception that exists around there objectives and how people outside of gaming think about them?

Edited October 14, 2014 by BruceVC

[Shallow]

Fair enough, I apologize for assuming the " shut the hell up " was directed to me

 

I have already acknowledged that the virtual abuse is from both sides, there are extremists with there own agendas within camp  

 

 

But my question is really  "what does civil society outside of this debate think is more serious or is worse abuse"

 

If you look at the link that was posted

http://www.businessinsider.com/gamergate-death-threats-2014-10

 

This is a business website and then add to that the CNN coverage I would say the GG camp should be more concerned about the perception that exists around there objectives and how people outside of gaming think about them?

 

Whilst it is indeed true that GG doesn't have as big a PR advantage with mainstream media as feminists, we have absolutely no way of controlling random internet whackjobs. the only thing that has been suggested, is that we all shut up because getting rid of internet whackjobs which is impossible without massive censorship and tyranical control should be higher priority than dealing with an issue that can be fixed, game journalist corruption. We can't possibly stop these people (both the ones on our side and yours), neither can you, thus it is stupid to tell us that we need to wait (you haven't specifically said this yourself, but this is the only thing that has been suggested to us to improve our PR) until these people are gone to have the game journalism corruption/censorship debate.

[Longknife]

 

 

You honestly don't see how **** like "why do there need to be more women in video games? It's a boy's hobby" is flat-out sexism?

 

 

 

Who the HELL said this?

 

Outside of this thread? Only a lot of people. You'd be shocked how many people are willing to say this out loud, type it on the internet for everyone to see, and act like it's normal. It's sickening.

 

Inside of this thread?

 

 it's the phrases like "the industry needs to stop doing X and think of what it is teaching society" kind of nonsense.

 

 

 

 

This convo suddenly reminds me of that time I challenged a SJW to name a game developer, gaming journalist or strong GamerGate proponent who's said something sexist. Lo and behold, no one can actually name one beyond pointing at anonymous Youtube comments on videos about Anita or Zoe Quinn.

[Longknife]

Morning update from twitter

 

Here article from Social Researcher who analyses in the article why "#Gamergate, as we know it now, is a hate group."

http://jezebel.com/gamergate-trolls-arent-ethics-crusaders-theyre-a-hate-1644984010

 

 

 

Just saying - and you may already be aware - that website looks and functions like Kotaku because it's also an affiliate of Gawker Media, just like Kotaku. It's also HIGHLY bias on such a topic as a rule of thumb (has written feminist-related stories before) and is not above controversy itself:

 

 

In 2010, Jezebel received widespread media coverage when it criticized The Daily Show for its treatment of women writers and correspondents.^[14] As a result of this publicity, the site was parodied as "JoanOfSnark.com" on an episode of 30 Rock, "TGS Hates Women".^[15] A Slate article at this time criticized the blog and similar feminist blogs for manipulating readers to achieve page views by masking anger (often aimed at attractive women) as a result of jealousy and insecurity as "righteously indignant rage" and promoting in-group behavior at the expense of rational discourse.^[16]

Kashmir Hill, of Forbes, has been critical of the blog on two occasions. In 2012, Jezebel faced criticism when it published screen shots of a video depicting a rape and some users threatened to boycott the site.^[17] Later, in November 2012, Jezebel was criticized for publicizing the names of teenagers who posted racist tweets in response to Barack Obama's re-election.^[18]

On January 16, 2014, Jezebel again offered $10,000 for unretouched magazine photos, this time specifically requesting unretouched images of Lena Dunham's recent spread for Vogue magazine.^[19] The offer was met with outrage by many in their readership.^[20] The bounty proved successful, and on January 17 Jezebel posted an expose of the unretouched images to the ire of many of their readers.^[21]

The website has been criticized at times for how it handles race issues, including its selection in July 2014 of a white woman as the new editor-in-chief over a black candidate who had been with the site since its founding

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jezebel_%28website%29

 

 

It's funny, it seems as though all of Gawker Media is met with controversy and questionable morals:

 

 

In January 2014, Quentin Tarantino filed a copyright lawsuit against Gawker Media for distribution of his 146-page script for The Hateful Eight. He claimed to have given the script to one of six few trusted colleagues, including Bruce Dern, Tim Roth, and Michael Madsen.^[26][27] Due to the spreading of his script, Tarantino told the media that he wouldn't continue with the movie. "Gawker Media has made a business of predatory journalism, violating people’s rights to make a buck," Tarantino said in his lawsuit. "This time they went too far. Rather than merely publishing a news story reporting that Plaintiff’s screenplay may have been circulating in Hollywood without his permission, Gawker Media crossed the journalistic line by promoting itself to the public as the first source to read the entire Screenplay illegally."

Edited October 14, 2014 by Longknife

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

You honestly don't see how **** like "why do there need to be more women in video games? It's a boy's hobby" is flat-out sexism?

 

 

 

Who the HELL said this?

 

Outside of this thread? Only a lot of people. You'd be shocked how many people are willing to say this out loud, type it on the internet for everyone to see, and act like it's normal. It's sickening.

 

Inside of this thread?

 

 it's the phrases like "the industry needs to stop doing X and think of what it is teaching society" kind of nonsense.

 

 

 

 

This convo suddenly reminds me of that time I challenged a SJW to name a game developer, gaming journalist or strong GamerGate proponent who's said something sexist. Lo and behold, no one can actually name one beyond pointing at anonymous Youtube comments on videos about Anita or Zoe Quinn.

 

 

Your observation or point  wasn't relevant back then and its still not relevant

 

I did explain this to you when you asked the question. No developer who cares about his job is going to publically say " I don't think women have a place in gaming or there is no point considering what appeal my game may have for gay fans "

 

Obviously not, this open bigotry would more than likely lead to that person being fired. So there is no point asking "show me an example of a developer saying he doesn't like women"

 

But its more what people don't say or rather there lack of interest in relevant transformation that should be a concern

[Blarghagh]

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).

[Shallow]

How gameplay is gonna be when people do halfassed "relevant transformations"  when they clearly don't fit and are being shoehorned into gameplay to please the SJW crowd:

Skyrim-Buys an amulet of Mara for cheaper restoration magic-Every male npc you can marry hits on you when you talk to them

That is such an improvement from Oblivion that just didn't bother with shoehorning in relationships. Or Morrowind for that matter, which included a very entertaining and well done bisexual great house councilman who you could tell wasn't just done dryly to please SJWs and feminist journalists. If homosexual or bisexual characters or even straight characters are going to be included, let them be included because developers want to do them, not because activist journalists will lie about your game (if you aren't an AA publisher the journalists are in bed with), not because SJWs will try to brand you as mysogynists, or will worship the ground you walk on as being inclusive.

TN: Some people did try to talk to them, which was followed by, you know, the whole gamers are dead thing, not like people hadn't been calling for ethics policies, and said policies being followed, for a decade now.

Edited October 14, 2014 by Shallow

[aluminiumtrioxid]

This convo suddenly reminds me of that time I challenged a SJW to name a game developer, gaming journalist or strong GamerGate proponent who's said something sexist. Lo and behold, no one can actually name one beyond pointing at anonymous Youtube comments on videos about Anita or Zoe Quinn.

 

 

James Desborough?

 

Also, Milo dude and his "you get your t*ts out for a living" comment?

Edited October 14, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Blarghagh]

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.

 

How gameplay is gonna be when people do halfassed "relevant transformations"  when they clearly don't fit and are being shoehorned into gameplay to please the SJW crowd:

Skyrim-Buys an amulet of Mara for cheaper restoration magic-Every male npc you can marry hits on you when you talk to them

That is such an improvement from Oblivion that just didn't bother with shoehorning in relationships. Or Morrowind for that matter, which included a very entertaining and well done bisexual great house councilman who you could tell wasn't just done dryly to please SJWs and feminist journalists. If homosexual or bisexual characters or even straight characters are going to be included, let them be included because developers want to do them, not because activist journalists will lie about your game (if you aren't an AA publisher the journalists are in bed with), not because SJWs will try to brand you as mysogynists, or will worship the ground you walk on as being inclusive.

TN: Some people did try to talk to them, which was followed by, you know, the whole gamers are dead thing, not like people hadn't been calling for ethics policies, and said policies being followed, for a decade now.

 

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.

Edited October 14, 2014 by TrueNeutral

[Shallow]

Looking for evidence of corruption is never a bad thing, regardless of how questionable your motives are, if someone is guilty, and your ways of acquiring proof is legal (and doesn't severely infringe on privacy), I'll be more than happy if someone spends their free time looking for and evaluating evidence. I don't see what is so bad about such witchhunts. If you're refering to boycotting campaigns instead then I also have no problem with them for obvious reasons.

[Blarghagh]

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.

[Shallow]

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.

Ah well, that stuff I don't condone, regardless of a persons political views no one has any right (though they still have a legal right) to reveal to the world without consent, that said person wears purple underwear decorated with elephants and hearts.

[Bryy]

Looking for evidence of corruption is never a bad thing, regardless of how questionable your motives are

Except what if that corruption doesn't exist? What if it only exists in your head because of your own prejudice?

[Malcador]

 

This convo suddenly reminds me of that time I challenged a SJW to name a game developer, gaming journalist or strong GamerGate proponent who's said something sexist. Lo and behold, no one can actually name one beyond pointing at anonymous Youtube comments on videos about Anita or Zoe Quinn.

 

James Desborough?

 

Also, Milo dude and his "you get your t*ts out for a living" comment?

 

Seems more insulting than sexist, there.

 

Amusingly, Quinn was invited to a HuffPo interview that turned out to be a debate, and she has cancelled in a panic.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

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?

 

If I remember correctly, the dude has an infraction history longer than my arm on RPG.net (a place where sexist comments are heavily sanctioned). I'll look into him.

[Nonek]

Gamergate benefits in that it was founded on an actual legitimate case of violating journalistic ethics, Mr Grayson sleeping with a developer and neither recusing himself, informing his editor or the audience of this conduct that brings his industry and publication into disrepute. However much this conflict of interest is denied, swept aside or the goalposts shifted this remains a constant. One cannot say that they have ethics or integrity when they are flagrantly abused in such a manner, and to deny this or ask that ethics and integrity not apply to Kotaku or any other publication renders them simply unfit for purpose.

 

Though moderate and neutral, this is why I err on Gamergates and (more importantly of course) the consumers side.

[Shallow]

 

Looking for evidence of corruption is never a bad thing, regardless of how questionable your motives are

Except what if that corruption doesn't exist? What if it only exists in your head because of your own prejudice?

Then whoever is looking for corruption is wasting their own personal time, so who cares?

[kirottu]

Gamergate benefits in that it was founded on an actual legitimate case of violating journalistic ethics, Mr Grayson sleeping with a developer and neither recusing himself, informing his editor or the audience of this conduct that brings his industry and publication into disrepute. However much this conflict of interest is denied, swept aside or the goalposts shifted this remains a constant. One cannot say that they have ethics or integrity when they are flagrantly abused in such a manner, and to deny this or ask that ethics and integrity not apply to Kotaku or any other publication renders them simply unfit for purpose.

 

Though moderate and neutral, this is why I err on Gamergates and (more importantly of course) the consumers side.

 

Grayson has said their romantic relationship started few days after the last article was published, but even if you were to believe they were strictly platonic business acquaintances before, getting one fact wrong doesn't disprove everything that has happened since.