Journalism and bias in the gaming industry

[Hurlshort]

 

 

'Lobbying for decourm' is just a more sneaky way of brainwashing people to shut up when they think differently than you. That's the first step of nazism. Nobody is being hurt in this thread. Your feels are TRIGGERING my feels. Stop triggering me by telling me I can't call out SJW stupidity.

 

 

I usually don't bother quoting Volo, but this is a good example of the bizarre behavior in this thread.  I come in and criticize the tone, and then get accused of trying to brainwash.  I'm encouraged to report to the authorities or GTFO.  Everyone is super defensive and super reactionary.  I have never seen anything like it here.    

[Volourn]

Sure you have.  You do it all the time.

[Malcador]

Well, you keep commenting on the thread being bad, so do something about it and report it and move on. I reported the horse rape comic, was rather surprised that Bruce said he doesn't like to report things (weird as that fixes the problem).

 

Barring that, then the only goal of repeatedly doing it is to satisfy yourself with lecturing on topics.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Malcador

[Namutree]

 

 

 

'Lobbying for decourm' is just a more sneaky way of brainwashing people to shut up when they think differently than you. That's the first step of nazism. Nobody is being hurt in this thread. Your feels are TRIGGERING my feels. Stop triggering me by telling me I can't call out SJW stupidity.

 

 

I usually don't bother quoting Volo, but this is a good example of the bizarre behavior in this thread.  I come in and criticize the tone, and then get accused of trying to brainwash.  I'm encouraged to report to the authorities or GTFO.  Everyone is super defensive and super reactionary.  I have never seen anything like it here.    

 

I'd guess they don't want to adopt the attitude you want them to have. Likely they feel that if they haven't broken any rules then they don't need to be reprimanded by anyone.

[Meshugger]

 

Do i really need to post this again? Random nobodies on the internet does better digging and journalism than any of the "gamers are dead"-writers, effectively showing how utterly corrupt the indie-scene is:

 

 

 

You do know I'm rightly cautious about accepting anything you link at face value since the whole "Sargon of Akkad fails at statistics" debacle, right?

 

Will watch it later. When it's not around midnight. Probably. (Will also react to the other posts.)

 

 

You mean when you accused him for being guilty by possible association and when the point was the "gamers do not need diversity" was bonkers you decided that the whole thing was moot since the study he critizised relied on faulty statistics? Even though it was quoted in almost every "gamers are dead"-article? And where you finally said that games really do need diversity without telling how that would be implemented without turning into tyranny?

 

I didn't buy that argument as much then either and i sure don't now.

 

 

 

 

'Lobbying for decourm' is just a more sneaky way of brainwashing people to shut up when they think differently than you. That's the first step of nazism. Nobody is being hurt in this thread. Your feels are TRIGGERING my feels. Stop triggering me by telling me I can't call out SJW stupidity.

 

 

I usually don't bother quoting Volo, but this is a good example of the bizarre behavior in this thread.  I come in and criticize the tone, and then get accused of trying to brainwash.  I'm encouraged to report to the authorities or GTFO.  Everyone is super defensive and super reactionary.  I have never seen anything like it here.    

 

 

Volourn is love. Volourn is life. We are all Volourn.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Meshugger

[Sakai]

That's an opinion, not a statement of fact. Mockery is protected in the US as free speech and has been used to criticize ideas and public figures effectively. You may not like it, but denying mockery is an effective and legitimate form of criticism is wrong. See Godfrey Elfwick or The Colbert Report as examples.

I hope you didn't just compare yourself to Colbert. Are we really going to equate something that is basically a step below (or above, what's the right word here? )of actual harrasment with professional political satire? And what's up with you and laws? Hate speech is protected in US too as far as i know. Yet i don't think you're going to defend it. 

 

Mocking =/= spreading hate.

Mocking a politician for supporting the FairTax because they are supporting a policy that puts a greater tax burden on low-income citizens is not spreading hate. Mocking a twitter feminist for claiming sexism against men doesn't exist or that being accused of rape is a good thing isn't spreading hate. Mocking a corporation for doing something hostile to consumers isn't spreading hate.

 

We may be petty in this thread, but we certainly aren't spreading hate.

Who do you think you are? Do you honestly believe that sending few random messages to random people would actually do something other than anger them? Do you honestly believe that this "slacktivism" as TB calls it compares to any real political activism? What change do you expect to happen by adding more fuel to the fire? You absolutely do spread hate. If not directly then inderectly. The only way out of this situation is dialogue. And that's what you're destroying by antagonizing people. If you're not interested in it yourself, don't make it worse for others at least.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Sakai

[Hurlshort]

There is nothing in the forum guidelines that says I can't lecture and reprimand.  Yay for free speech.

 

Maybe if I was driving this thread off-topc, that might be a decent argument for constantly telling me to leave the thread, but you guys rarely discuss actual journalism here.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

You mean when you accused him for being guilty by possible association and when the point was the "gamers do not need diversity" was bonkers you decided that the whole thing was moot since the study he critizised relied on faulty statistics?

 

 

 

The statistics the study relied on were sloppy, but acceptable for the conclusions it was trying to support. Sociologists have an implicit understanding that the sample sizes used generally give fairly low confidence levels.

 

Applying those statistics as "proof" that "gamers don't need diversity" is a dire statistical error, however. When applied at that scope, the sample size gives a confidence level lower than 50%! It's worse odds than that of a coin toss, and you're not seeing anybody trying to justify their conclusions with "well, it came up heads, so I must be right"! And it's the height of irresponsibility, if not malice, to claim that the study that's simply not applicable outside of its scope due to this issue was "intentionally buried by lying feminists" because "it didn't fit the agenda". If I believed for a moment that Sargon of Akkad knew anything about statistics, I'd have to hold him in absolute contempt for knowingly abusing science to support his crusade against feminism. Thankfully, I know not to attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.

 

 

 

And where you finally said that games really do need diversity without telling how that would be implemented without turning into tyranny?

 

 

Do you know how to solve world hunger? Or to prevent wars?

 

Are you allowed to see world hunger and wars as problems humanity faces, despite not having a solution for them?

[Malcador]

Well no one's said you are violating rules, just seems to not be that sensible.

[Meshugger]

 

 

You mean when you accused him for being guilty by possible association and when the point was the "gamers do not need diversity" was bonkers you decided that the whole thing was moot since the study he critizised relied on faulty statistics?

 

 

 

The statistics the study relied on were sloppy, but acceptable for the conclusions it was trying to support. Sociologists have an implicit understanding that the sample sizes used generally give fairly low confidence levels.

 

Applying those statistics as "proof" that "gamers don't need diversity" is a dire statistical error, however. When applied at that scope, the sample size gives a confidence level lower than 50%! It's worse odds than that of a coin toss, and you're not seeing anybody trying to justify their conclusions with "well, it came up heads, so I must be right"! And it's the height of irresponsibility, if not malice, to claim that the study that's simply not applicable outside of its scope due to this issue was "intentionally buried by lying feminists" because "it didn't fit the agenda". If I believed for a moment that Sargon of Akkad knew anything about statistics, I'd have to hold him in absolute contempt for knowingly abusing science to support his crusade against feminism. Thankfully, I know not to attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.

 

 

 

And where you finally said that games really do need diversity without telling how that would be implemented without turning into tyranny?

 

 

Do you know how to solve world hunger? Or to prevent wars?

 

Are you allowed to see world hunger and wars as problems humanity faces, despite not having a solution for them?

 

 

Time for bed, i'll reply later.

[Nonek]

It's nice to sit back and admire what we have done as Gamergaters: The disruptive and hateful people such as Leigh Alexander, Ben Kuchera and Bob Chipman who have lost their jobs, the multiple companies that have instituted or updated their ethics policies, Gawker media being severely impacted by our efforts and its own shoddy practises, the developers, journalists and publishers who have been reminded to not spit on their customer base or demonise consumers as they have been doing for years, until it's become fashionable.

 

Of course there are still problems: The media and SJF lies that GG is a hate movement, when they are the ones who support #killallmen and employ neo Nazi's, the unproven claims of harassment that are lapped up by those whom wish to confirm their hatred and bias of anyone not buying into their ideological, sexist and racist hatred of all those whom play games recreationally, and lastly apologies must be gained from those whom have made any negative comments against gamers.

 

Still I think if we endure and keep a steady course we moderates standing up for the consumer, rather than championing the corrupt establishment, will achieve many more victories. I think i'll have a few glasses to celebrate our goodly work. Hah.

[Volourn]

"There is nothing in the forum guidelines that says I can't lecture and reprimand.  Yay for free speech.

 

Maybe if I was driving this thread off-topc, that might be a decent argument for constantly telling me to leave the thread, but you guys rarely discuss actual journalism here."

 

You can stay all you want - just don't expect people to bow to your feels.

 

 

"The disruptive and hateful people such as Leigh Alexander, Ben Kuchera and Bob Chipman who have lost their jobs,"

 

They did? Don't know about the last goof but the first two I didn't know lost their jobs/ WUT?

[Sakai]

It's nice to sit back and admire what we have done as Gamergaters

What you personally have done?

[Volourn]

"What you personally have done?"

 

I'm still alive playing games even though SJWs have murdered me and celebrated my death.  That's plenty enough to win.

[Nonek]

Well I don't like to brag Sakai dear boy, but thank you.

[Sakai]

Well I don't like to brag Sakai dear boy, but thank you.

Thank you for what? I asked you a question. What have you actually done besides using #gamergate?

Edited April 19, 2015 by Sakai

[Nonek]

What did I do? As I said I don't like to brag dear boy, but once again thank you for the attribution, my part was small but together us ants can move mountains. Off to celebrate with a nice Mosel, chin chin.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Nonek

[Fighter]

Is Anita S also just an unstable nobody or is it ok to make fun of her?

 

A guy made a tweet to make a point and it's just hilarious.

 

[Hurlshort]

Well no one's said you are violating rules, just seems to not be that sensible.

 

Is attacking SJW's in a place where there are no SJW's all that sensible?  Maybe I'm just trying to fit in.

[Sakai]

What did I do? As I said I don't like to brag dear boy, but once again thank you for the attribution, my part was small but together us ants can move mountains. Off to celebrate with a nice Mosel, chin chin.

So basically you haven't done anything, yet you say "we". I guess it's nice to think of yourself as crusader for justice without actually having to do anything.

[Namutree]

Just brag Nonek.

[Malcador]

Is attacking SJW's in a place where there are no SJW's all that sensible?  Maybe I'm just trying to fit in.

Well it is, forums are for collective bashing or praise after all. Not really sensible to wade in to something that annoys you, then whine about it but refrain from taking measures to resolve it. But, again, the conclusion that's left is probably accurate.

 

As for Gamergate doing anything, nahh, all it's done is raise the profile and Patreon donations of Sarkeesian, Wu, Quinn, etc. And I guess given Twitter hounds who want to show how socially aware they are (like Cheong) some meat to get some credibility. But hey at least no one died, people were seriously speaking of ruined lives with this silliness.

[Fighter]

Making fun of stupid things on the internet is serious business and upsetting to some. My contribution was the "vitriol" of mocking stupidity and bigotry.

[Oerwinde]

Is Anita S also just an unstable nobody or is it ok to make fun of her?

 

A guy made a tweet to make a point and it's just hilarious.

 

Context? Because I don't get the hilarity. It just looks like a guy denying the Armenian genocide

[Hurlshort]

Is Anita S also just an unstable nobody or is it ok to make fun of her?

 

A guy made a tweet to make a point and it's just hilarious.

 

 

How is that hilarious?

 

 

Anita S. is the closest to a celebrity in this whole thing, and given the fact that she has done a good job of leveraging this into a profitable and marketable endeavor, it makes a lot more sense to be critical of her message.  

 

But yeah, that doesn't excuse all the gross threats.