Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Gfted1]

Also can we be crass little bastards and talk about how hilarious these threats with DAT GRAMMERZ is?

 

 

[img=http://i.imgur.com/oa3y2Uf.png

They are just "venting", nothing to see here...

[Longknife]

 

Also can we be crass little bastards and talk about how hilarious these threats with DAT GRAMMERZ is?

 

 

[img=http://i.imgur.com/oa3y2Uf.png

They are just "venting", nothing to see here...

 

 

 

What's sad is it totally sounds like something the average BR on your standard MMORPG would say to an opposing faction. :D

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Let's not jump straight to conclusions, for all we know someone else could be responsible. I see no need for us to be making accusations without proof. We don't want to bring ourselves down to the level of our opponents.

 

 

 

  In what regard?

 

The poster has transcripts and screenshots of everything, including the deleted tweets.

The accused party is so stupid he saw the video and thought "hey great opportunity to promote my show." Honestly the guy seems mental, like he's a sociopath or something.

The quote I gave implicates him. I'm also trying to ask the poster of the video to clarify if he/she knows that the guy is behind the Utah threat since the video makes it unclear.

 

Not disagreeing with you, just not quite sure what you're referring to.

I'm talking specifically about the Utah threat. Ganergate as a whole has been accused of stuff the majority of people weren't involved with sans proof, and I see no reason to lower ourselves to the level of those who would do such a thing.

 

I think it's very clear this guy was up to some ****ed up ****, but I'd prefer to blame him for what we have proof of. Which as far as I can tell is a lot of stuff.

[Longknife]

 

 

Let's not jump straight to conclusions, for all we know someone else could be responsible. I see no need for us to be making accusations without proof. We don't want to bring ourselves down to the level of our opponents.

 

 

  In what regard?

 

The poster has transcripts and screenshots of everything, including the deleted tweets.

The accused party is so stupid he saw the video and thought "hey great opportunity to promote my show." Honestly the guy seems mental, like he's a sociopath or something.

The quote I gave implicates him. I'm also trying to ask the poster of the video to clarify if he/she knows that the guy is behind the Utah threat since the video makes it unclear.

 

Not disagreeing with you, just not quite sure what you're referring to.

I'm talking specifically about the Utah threat. Ganergate as a whole has been accused of stuff the majority of people weren't involved with sans proof, and I see no reason to lower ourselves to the level of those who would do such a thing.

I think it's very clear this guy was up to some ****ed up ****, but I'd prefer to blame him for what we have proof of. Which as far as I can tell is a lot of stuff.

Just curious then in how you don't see it as proof? The YouTube comment directly implicates him as the culprit, there's no other logical interpretation of it that I see. You saying you're not reading it that way or that you'd rather not have to rely on a random youtube comment by him as a form of proof?

[Fighter]

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

 

Let's not jump straight to conclusions, for all we know someone else could be responsible. I see no need for us to be making accusations without proof. We don't want to bring ourselves down to the level of our opponents.

 

 

  In what regard?

 

The poster has transcripts and screenshots of everything, including the deleted tweets.

The accused party is so stupid he saw the video and thought "hey great opportunity to promote my show." Honestly the guy seems mental, like he's a sociopath or something.

The quote I gave implicates him. I'm also trying to ask the poster of the video to clarify if he/she knows that the guy is behind the Utah threat since the video makes it unclear.

 

Not disagreeing with you, just not quite sure what you're referring to.

I'm talking specifically about the Utah threat. Ganergate as a whole has been accused of stuff the majority of people weren't involved with sans proof, and I see no reason to lower ourselves to the level of those who would do such a thing.

I think it's very clear this guy was up to some ****ed up ****, but I'd prefer to blame him for what we have proof of. Which as far as I can tell is a lot of stuff.

Just curious then in how you don't see it as proof? The YouTube comment directly implicates him as the culprit, there's no other logical interpretation of it that I see. You saying you're not reading it that way or that you'd rather not have to rely on a random youtube comment by him as a form of proof?

I'm saying I would like to see more than a YouTube comment as proof. I'll agree it does look strange to claim that the threat came from outside the US, I'm just not completely sure this guy was behind it. I'd personally like to be without reasonable doubt before I condemn someone, evern if that someone is obviously piece of ****.

[Zoraptor]

 

In Brazil the authorities always seek cases that present real risk, not a supposed threat from the other side of the world, it is quite funny. From what I saw, in the United States is not so different, since the University of Utah also shrugged off the threats, that the activist claimed to have received. 

 

If you read my articles you will see it contains no threat or incitement to violence against the person of Anita, but only I expose my opinion about Tropes vs Women.

 

That's the top comment on the video, written by him.

 

He's implying the Utah threat was by someone out of country, something he could not know unless it was him.

 

That the threat came from out of the country was very strongly suspected since it was made, as was that that was the reason it was not taken seriously by the University.

 

His english ain't good enough to determine what he means at all, his pronouns, tenses etc are all over the place.

[Longknife]

 

 

 

 

Let's not jump straight to conclusions, for all we know someone else could be responsible. I see no need for us to be making accusations without proof. We don't want to bring ourselves down to the level of our opponents.

 

In what regard?

 

The poster has transcripts and screenshots of everything, including the deleted tweets.

The accused party is so stupid he saw the video and thought "hey great opportunity to promote my show." Honestly the guy seems mental, like he's a sociopath or something.

The quote I gave implicates him. I'm also trying to ask the poster of the video to clarify if he/she knows that the guy is behind the Utah threat since the video makes it unclear.

 

Not disagreeing with you, just not quite sure what you're referring to.

I'm talking specifically about the Utah threat. Ganergate as a whole has been accused of stuff the majority of people weren't involved with sans proof, and I see no reason to lower ourselves to the level of those who would do such a thing.

I think it's very clear this guy was up to some ****ed up ****, but I'd prefer to blame him for what we have proof of. Which as far as I can tell is a lot of stuff.

Just curious then in how you don't see it as proof? The YouTube comment directly implicates him as the culprit, there's no other logical interpretation of it that I see. You saying you're not reading it that way or that you'd rather not have to rely on a random youtube comment by him as a form of proof?

I'm saying I would like to see more than a YouTube comment as proof. I'll agree it does look strange to claim that the threat came from outside the US, I'm just not completely sure this guy was behind it. I'd personally like to be without reasonable doubt before I condemn someone, evern if that someone is obviously piece of ****.

Kk was just curious what you meant and if I'd missed something with the comment. EDIT: like the above lulz. Didn't know that.

 

And yeah this guy definitely seems unstable IMO. He seems narcissistic and odd. Never would've guessed that the threats WERENT from trolls just looking for lulz, but from some random idiot with delusions of grandeur down in Brazil. I mean GNAA confessed to being a part of the problem sure, but still I gotta admit I didn't think we'd see a legit creep involved with these threats.

 

It's kinda scary to think about and puts things in perspective. I don't think anything would've come of this guy, but let's say this is all about the copycat mentality. Let's say he thought of doing this because someone else did it before him. After all, Anita's gotten and published threats since she hit the net. It kinda highlights how when they say don't publish your threats cause it encourages copycats, they're not just referring to copycat trolls goofing around, but copycat weirdos thinking....who knows what. Also highlights how surprisingly, GGs little efforts to stop the threats didn't just catch some guy saying "but it's fun," but caught a guy of legit mental instability. I have no proof of that mind you, but the man is currently promoting himself and his channel on the channel of the people who caught him, blissfully unaware of what exactly he's gotten himself into. Hell even his name and the way he refers to himself in the third person at times speaks of delusion.

 

 

Guess it's always sort of like this though. Sometimes reality can be stranger than fiction, simply because at times a work of fiction will attempt logical ties that simply don't always exist in reality.

Edited October 30, 2014 by Longknife

[Keyrock]

His english ain't good enough to determine what he means at all, his pronouns, tenses etc are all over the place.

 

In fairness, that describes a sadly not insignificant percentage of Americans too. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

His english ain't good enough to determine what he means at all, his pronouns, tenses etc are all over the place.

 

In fairness, that describes a sadly not insignificant percentage of Americans too.

Are ya caulin us morans?

[Zoraptor]

Are ya caulin us morans?

 

 

Being called a moran is a mark of respect, and means that you're an online pal, better than a mere acquaintance though not close enough to be invited to a wedding.

[Orogun01]

Today my hope for humanity and all of my dreams have died....

No matter what will be achieved it will be a Pyrrhic victory, the cost has been too high.

 

[Longknife]

Today my hope for humanity and all of my dreams have died....

No matter what will be achieved it will be a Pyrrhic victory, the cost has been too high.

 

No worries, I'm sure that screenshot is just Avellone shortly before choke slamming her through and office table for her terrible tone in her articles.

[Keyrock]

 

Today my hope for humanity and all of my dreams have died....

No matter what will be achieved it will be a Pyrrhic victory, the cost has been too high.

 

No worries, I'm sure that screenshot is just Avellone shortly before choke slamming her through and office table for her terrible tone in her articles.

 

You can stand in line with someone and not be best pals with them.  Also, you can be friends with someone and not share all views with them.  Also also, let's not wish physical harm on anyone, even if it's in jest, especially given current circumstances.  I have no desire to see any physical harm come to Ms. Alexander.  Her being exposed for the hack, click-bait "journalist" she is, that's another story.

[Longknife]

Do we know the context of that photo or not?

[pseudonymous]

Do we know the context of that photo or not?

 

We live in a world where telling a stranger to have a nice day while walking past her is harassment, so clearly the feminazis are harassing Chris Avelone for less **** jokes.

[Orogun01]

Do we know the context of that photo or not?

Apparently it was live text adventure thing...

 

But that's not what the takeaway should be, our dear Avellone had to breathe the same air as those people. I don't think I can bear the the thought of it; I might faint if there's a picture of them touching.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Meh, I think the recent Total Biscuit interviews have much more bearing on this than pictures like that. I'd rather talk about advancing a standard of ethics than clutching pearls over every appearance of one of the LWs with someone I respect.

[Volourn]

So.. Obsidian supports  people who want to kill their customer base? Interesting.

 

Good thing I don't play games and decide what games to buy based on such nonsense - as long as Obsidian continues to make games with female characetrs to oggle and the oppurutinty to mass  murder men I'll be happy.

Edited October 31, 2014 by Volourn

[Longknife]

Did you guys happen to catch the rumors (and let me clarify, pure rumors) that the Colbert interview was highly edited down?

 

Some guy was claiming he saw it taped live and Anita seemed highly uncomfortable. Allegedly at one point Colbert asked "do you think video games cause and promote violence?" and Anita answered no, to which he followed up "then how can they cause misogyny?"

Trying to find the post right now. I only name it cause I can TOTALLY see it happening, both because it sounds in character and because the interview....well didn't it seem a little short compared to the average Colbert interview? Haven't been able to watch it in a good while but I remember them being longer.

 

 

EDIT: Derp, twas not hard to find, I was just blind: http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2kt77i/unverified_comment_colbert_interview_may_have/

 

 

EDIT2: OP's attempt at evidence: https://archive.today/ZSsxv

Edited October 31, 2014 by Longknife

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Did you guys happen to catch the rumors (and let me clarify, pure rumors) that the Colbert interview was highly edited down?

 

Some guy was claiming he saw it taped live and Anita seemed highly uncomfortable. Allegedly at one point Colbert asked "do you think video games cause and promote violence?" and Anita answered no, to which he followed up "then how can they cause misogyny?"

 

Trying to find the post right now. I only name it cause I can TOTALLY see it happening, both because it sounds in character and because the interview....well didn't it seem a little short compared to the average Colbert interview? Haven't been able to watch it in a good while but I remember them being longer.

 

 

EDIT: Derp, twas not hard to find, I was just blind: http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2kt77i/unverified_comment_colbert_interview_may_have/

From what I could tell it was the middle segment of the show rather than the interview portion, which IIRC(haven't regularly watched the show for a while) is shorter than the beginning segment or interview segment. Not sure if this is true or not(Trust but Verify), but it wouldn't surprise me very much.

[Longknife]

 

Did you guys happen to catch the rumors (and let me clarify, pure rumors) that the Colbert interview was highly edited down?

 

Some guy was claiming he saw it taped live and Anita seemed highly uncomfortable. Allegedly at one point Colbert asked "do you think video games cause and promote violence?" and Anita answered no, to which he followed up "then how can they cause misogyny?"

 

Trying to find the post right now. I only name it cause I can TOTALLY see it happening, both because it sounds in character and because the interview....well didn't it seem a little short compared to the average Colbert interview? Haven't been able to watch it in a good while but I remember them being longer.

 

 

EDIT: Derp, twas not hard to find, I was just blind: http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2kt77i/unverified_comment_colbert_interview_may_have/

From what I could tell it was the middle segment of the show rather than the interview portion, which IIRC(haven't regularly watched the show for a while) is shorter than the beginning segment or interview segment. Not sure if this is true or not(Trust but Verify), but it wouldn't surprise me very much.

 

 

 

What I find interesting is (and if you haven't seen, check my second edit) this part:

 

From what else I can remember, he elaborated asking about the bomb threat she got at the university she visited, asked if they found who it was, but she couldn't talk about an active FBI investigation.

 

 

 

Let's, for argument's sake, assume this is true. Wouldn't this imply she's involved with the FBI investigation, which contradicts the fact that she's actively ignoring and blocking evidence that helps to catch and implicate the guy harassing her and all they need is for her to file a report herself?

 

It's impossible to prove this as the OP clearly can't prove this was said; best he offered was a photo from the Colbert audience. Hypothetically though, if this turned out to be true, then omfg what a con. I'm sorry we'll never know cause I'm curious to know if people do exist that have the audacity to pull this kind of stuff or not.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

Did you guys happen to catch the rumors (and let me clarify, pure rumors) that the Colbert interview was highly edited down?

 

Some guy was claiming he saw it taped live and Anita seemed highly uncomfortable. Allegedly at one point Colbert asked "do you think video games cause and promote violence?" and Anita answered no, to which he followed up "then how can they cause misogyny?"

 

Trying to find the post right now. I only name it cause I can TOTALLY see it happening, both because it sounds in character and because the interview....well didn't it seem a little short compared to the average Colbert interview? Haven't been able to watch it in a good while but I remember them being longer.

 

 

EDIT: Derp, twas not hard to find, I was just blind: http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2kt77i/unverified_comment_colbert_interview_may_have/

From what I could tell it was the middle segment of the show rather than the interview portion, which IIRC(haven't regularly watched the show for a while) is shorter than the beginning segment or interview segment. Not sure if this is true or not(Trust but Verify), but it wouldn't surprise me very much.

 

 

 

What I find interesting is (and if you haven't seen, check my second edit) this part:

 

From what else I can remember, he elaborated asking about the bomb threat she got at the university she visited, asked if they found who it was, but she couldn't talk about an active FBI investigation.

 

 

Let's, for argument's sake, assume this is true. Wouldn't this imply she's involved with the FBI investigation, which contradicts the fact that she's actively ignoring and blocking evidence that helps to catch and implicate the guy harassing her and all they need is for her to file a report herself?

 

It's impossible to prove this as the OP clearly can't prove this was said; best he offered was a photo from the Colbert audience. Hypothetically though, if this turned out to be true, then omfg what a con. I'm sorry we'll never know cause I'm curious to know if people do exist that have the audacity to pull this kind of stuff or not.

 

I read the thread on KiA. Like I said, I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, but I'd like to verify it before I accepted it as fact. From the segment itself, a non-gg supporter(not anti either) I know on Bleeding Cool was pissed off at her "inflammatory over reaching feminist dribble" so I don't think the segment went over as well with gamers as some think.

 

But apparently gamers and gamergate are dead...for the fifth time now? I'm not sure if we're respawning at this point or if those pronouncing us dead are just clueless about medicine.

 

As to Anita ignoring gg catching someone harassing her...it isn't like I thought she was the paragon of moral superiority before, and I'm not surprised she would(being charitable here) rather ignore ad from what she perceives to be an ideological enemy than stop harassment.

Edited October 31, 2014 by KaineParker

[Orogun01]

They sometimes edit the show on the TV for advert space, is it on the web? Or were the portions removed or never existed?

[Longknife]

Yeah I wasn't speaking from any context from this being relevant in the sense we can even hope to prove or disprove it, but rather...

 

 

All my life I've been referred tO as personable and intelligent, and while I'm still DAMNED young, (well, I consider 25 young when talking of experience) I'm learning my intuition is good. Incredibly good.

A common thing I do is try to imagine myself in other people's shoes. I consider referring to other people as bad or evil to be lazy reasoning, as everyone has good intentions and rule of thumb is that the reasonings you would use are likely to be utilized by others as well. With this system, I often have an easy time understanding and sympathizing with others.

 

Then there are times I cannot. And those few times I can't are absolutely fascinating to me. I'm curious by nature and wish to understand how things work, so when people exist and I don't understand their pattern of thinking, it fascinates me. This is one of those occasions in that I consider myself a very objective, analytical thinker, and this doesn't line up with the thought process of hers well. Likewise, I loathe lying. I simply cannot do it in many many situations.

 

For what it's worth, my gut tells me to believe the guy claiming he was in the Colbert audience, and while I'm not trying to propose that as evidence nor do I want people believing it solely cause I said to (nonsense thinking), I'm saying my mind is set on this, which leads me to a situation where I cannot properly understand Anita based on this combined with her blocking the support with the harasser. It's such blatant self-promotion and dishonesty that I cannot believe it exists, and I end up questioning myself 20 times over what other explanations there could be, or if such people truly exist. And yeah, I'm curious enough that it annoys the **** out of me to know I'll never get a straight answer on this issue, I'll just be left wondering. Probably why I bring it up regardless of its irrelevance to GG; cause it's important enough TO ME that I wanna hear viewpoints on it.

 

In short, I just have difficulty believing such people actually exist. I have no problem trying to picture what Zoe Quinn is like. She just seems childish, depression-ridden and maybe with elements of a pathological liar who seeks social acceptance and approval. I'm familiar with that type and view it as anxiety preventing one from taking personal responsibility. But Anita...? I don't get it. It just seems so shamelessly fixated on self-promotion and profit by any means, all while being untruthful for no good reason and with no good excuse at all.