Speaking of Anita, she is quitting: https://archive.is/pZvPr
I wonder what her Kickstarter supporters think of her not living up to her original commitments?
I've never understood why people who clearly disagree with Sarkeesian, probably don't watch her videos, and definitely did not pledge her kickstarter always try and make this argument. Judging by her kickstarter page, there are 12 videos up with 3 hours and 40 minutes of content. She has produced plenty of content. She made a pretty penny doing so. There is nothing wrong with that, it is capitalism at work.
Looking at the comments from backers, it looks like quite a few of them are happy. The idea that her initial outline doesn't match up with what you feel was delivered is inconsequential, because that is generally accepted as the risk you run in any crowdfunding project.
Well I can't speak for other people but as a proponent of Kickstarter and this new form of funding I have argued with detractors of the method, and they have commonly brought up the examples of all the Kickstarters that have not delivered, and the Kickstarters that have delivered far less content than they promised, as examples of why they do not use or agree with the practise. In other words this form of funding is being brought into disrepute by the bad apples, according to the outside opinion. Obviously I try to tell them that one should only back projects which are of assured quality and produced by reputable companies: Obsidian for instance has a history of delivering on draconian timescales, stability of the product notwithstanding and are known for this, thus why I felt assured giving them money.
I also make the argument that risk is inherent, though can be mitigated, that Saarkesian is of course the sock puppet of a fraud who is obviously using fashionable outrage and demonisation through cherry picking content to make disproved conspiracy theories, while Tim Schafer is a spendthrift who cannot be trusted financially, and neither of these should be trusted. They of course reply that Mr Schafer was massively overfunded and yet produced a game that would hardly pass as a demo a quarter of a century ago, while Ms Saarkesian is hardly faced with a momentous task making bog standard Youtube (no offense to Youtubers who make far more, better researched content without any crowdfunding at all) content, with other peoples art, an unresearched cherry picked speech rife with fallacies and no strenuous editing tricks used.
I cannot argue with this, they are right, there is no excuse for such poor showings on Kickstarter when Obsidian, Larian and even more so Logic Artists are producing such fine content in comparison. The investors who got taken may be happy with being shortchanged, that is their right and the exploitable will remain a constant among consumers, but from what i've seen this does harm to crowdfunding as an alternative means to the publishing method.
Edited by Nonek, 23 January 2016 - 09:17 AM.