Blizzard CEO Calls Out Those "Tarnishing Our Reputation as Gamers"

[UberPubert]

Maybe if the gaming community would stop playing the "No True Scotsman" card every time someone within the gaming community did something toxic, people would stop associating toxic things with gamers. Silence is acquiescence, and all that.

This is pure contradiction. If the gaming community is constantly distancing themselves from others who do things that are toxic, how are they being silent?

You're taking the constant rebuttals of "this person isn't representative of the gaming community, we're actually pretty decent people on the whole" and going "why aren't you doing more distance yourself from these people?"

This is unreasonable.

When faced with harassment, death threats, swatting, and more, people need to do more than go "Gamergate is a diverse community." and call it a day.

By all means; suggest a permanent, practical solution for a leaderless, loosely organized group of tens of thousands of people who come from all across the spectrum of gaming. They've already tried funding charities, they've already tried hunting down the people causing the harassment and calling them out, they've argued - at length - about how the movement concerns legitimate issues and not toxic behavior, and nothing has worked.

"Gamergate is a diverse community." isn't just a half-hearted deflection of criticisms about individuals posting under the #gamergate hashtag, it's a statement of fact about the people involved.

 

[delroland]

By all means; suggest a permanent, practical solution for a leaderless, loosely organized group of tens of thousands of people who come from all across the spectrum of gaming. They've already tried funding charities, they've already tried hunting down the people causing the harassment and calling them out, they've argued - at length - about how the movement concerns legitimate issues and not toxic behavior, and nothing has worked.

"Gamergate is a diverse community." isn't just a half-hearted deflection of criticisms about individuals posting under the #gamergate hashtag, it's a statement of fact about the people involved.

Here's a permanent, practical solution: leave GamerGate and form a new group that actually works toward enacting change instead of organizing disingenuous boycotts which hurt no one that actually has the means to enact change in the industry.

Or is Adam Baldwin held in such high regard that a phrase he invented to describe something he has no understanding about is too sacred to be discarded?

OT: Morhaine's right, I wish people would stop slandering the gaming community as toxic bigots.

Maybe if the gaming community would stop playing the "No True Scotsman" card every time someone within the gaming community did something toxic, people would stop associating toxic things with gamers. Silence is acquiescence, and all that. When faced with harassment, death threats, swatting, and more, people need to do more than go "Gamergate is a diverse community." and call it a day.

What would you have gamers do?

The only thing I can think of is to ignore any accusations altogether. Seems to work for feminists anyway, who have a similar toxic element in their "movement".

But it's not about feminism, it's about ethics in game journalism.

 

[UberPubert]

Here's a permanent, practical solution: leave GamerGate and form a new group that actually works toward enacting change

Now I'm curious: How would you suggest this new movement work towards actual change?

Or is Adam Baldwin held in such high regard that a phrase he invented to describe something he has no understanding about is too sacred to be discarded?

Go ahead and ask around, nobody cares about Adam Baldwin or the name "gamergate", it just so happens to be as good as any other name people could come up with and it stuck.

 

[delroland]

Here's a permanent, practical solution: leave GamerGate and form a new group that actually works toward enacting change

Now I'm curious: How would you suggest this new movement work towards actual change?

That's not my problem; you wanted a suggestion and I gave it.

GamerGate is the group with the bad reputation (warranted or not), and so the onus falls on them to do something about it. If attempts to garner positive press have failed, and they have, then it's time to abandon ship and come up with something else.

I mean, we're only on the first page and we already have feminism bashing. That's not a good indicator of the social health of the group.

 

[Kameburger]

Man I keep seeing the argument that Blizzard doesn't police their own community enough so they shouldn't talk but outside of banning players, what can you really do? they have 14 million players, more than some small countries. I know some people have problems with libertarianism but Jesus Christ lol.

But yes he is right, please stop harassing and bullying people... Also please stop saying weirdly hypocritical things about how it's ok to harass and bully people in GG because someone in GG did that.

 

[UberPubert]

That's not my problem; you wanted a suggestion and I gave it.

GamerGate is the group with the bad reputation (warranted or not), and so the onus falls on them to do something about it. If attempts to garner positive press have failed, and they have, then it's time to abandon ship and come up with something else.

And what is that something else? How would you suggest that something else work differently? What reason do either of us have to believe that something else won't be lambasted the game way gamergate has?

I mean, we're only on the first page and we already have feminism bashing. That's not a good indicator of the social health of the group.

And yet nowhere in Smiliomaniac's post did he even mention Gamergate. If that's all it takes to be associated with Gamergate, I'm not surprised people take offense with it.

But I am disappointed.

 

[delroland]

That's not my problem; you wanted a suggestion and I gave it.

GamerGate is the group with the bad reputation (warranted or not), and so the onus falls on them to do something about it. If attempts to garner positive press have failed, and they have, then it's time to abandon ship and come up with something else.

And what is that something else? How would you suggest that something else work differently? What reason do either of us have to believe that something else won't be lambasted the game way gamergate has?

You asked for a permanent solution. I provided a permanent solution. It's not my responsibility to consider the logistics for said solution.

I mean, we're only on the first page and we already have feminism bashing. That's not a good indicator of the social health of the group.

And yet nowhere in Smiliomaniac's post did he even mention Gamergate. If that's all it takes to be associated with Gamergate, I'm not surprised people take offense with it.

But I am disappointed.

Are you suggesting Smiliomaniac isn't pro-GamerGate? Because that is simple enough to sort out: all you have to do is ask him. In fact, I will right now.

What would you have gamers do?

The only thing I can think of is to ignore any accusations altogether. Seems to work for feminists anyway, who have a similar toxic element in their "movement".

Just to be clear, Smilomaniac, are you pro-GamerGate?

In case he doesn't answer, here's a link to another post of his where it seems pretty obvious that he shares the core beliefs of the GamerGate movement:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.860762-GamerGate-Discussion-Debate-and-Resources?page=1063#21562916

 

[UberPubert]

You asked for a permanent solution. I provided a permanent solution. It's not my responsibility to consider the logistics for said solution.

Then that's not a solution. What you have suggested is finding an alternative, an alternative with no apparent solution to the current problems.

Are you suggesting Smiliomaniac isn't pro-GamerGate? Because that is simple enough to sort out: all you have to do is ask him. In fact, I will right now.

What I'm suggesting is that nothing about Smiliomaniac's post pertains to Gamergate, and that's true whether he's pro-Gamergate or not. You would need a significant portion of people who are bashing feminism in the name of Gamergate for such a thing to be true.

 

[delroland]

You asked for a permanent solution. I provided a permanent solution. It's not my responsibility to consider the logistics for said solution.

Then that's not a solution. What you have suggested is finding an alternative, an alternative with no apparent solution to the current problems.

It is a solution. You just don't like it.

Are you suggesting Smiliomaniac isn't pro-GamerGate? Because that is simple enough to sort out: all you have to do is ask him. In fact, I will right now.

What I'm suggesting is that nothing about Smiliomaniac's post pertains to Gamergate, and that's true whether he's pro-Gamergate or not. You would need a significant portion of people who are pro-Gamergate bashing feminism for such a thing to be true.

1) Smiliomaniac is in all likelihood a GamerGater.

2) He posted in a thread that is currently discussing GamerGate, responding to the statement that GamerGate needs to do more than speak of its diversity.

3) He made an anti-feminist remark in his response to the criticism of GamerGate, a movement in which he seems to belong.

How does his statement not pertain to GamerGate?

As far as your claim that there is not a significant portion of GamerGaters who bash feminism:

Example being Laurie Penny. Infamous British feminist. Ryan Gosling saved her life, pulled her away from a car which would have crushed her... and she goes moans about Gosling not running on twitter screaming about that was the highlight of his day. Then she shat on American man in general.

Her article actually didn't say any of those things: https://archive.today/nDEpI

Hey now, that's not fair. Bateman got where he did through skill, not having a vagina and whining!

... comparing her to the main character from American Psycho.

These were pulled from the top link on KotakuInAction, the reddit "headquarters" of GamerGate. There are about twenty or thirty replies all supporting this mindset. This is out of 512 comments, so about 6%, and NO ONE ELSE in the thread calls them out on it. That is a significant portion of GamerGaters who either bash feminism or tolerate feminism bashing.

This was in a thread that had NOTHING to do with feminism.

 

[UberPubert]

It is a solution. You just don't like it.

You have yet to explain how it would solve anything, how is it a solution?

1) Smiliomaniac is in all likelihood a GamerGater.

2) He posted in a thread that is currently discussing GamerGate, responding to the statement that GamerGate needs to do more than speak of its diversity.

3) He made an anti-feminist remark in his response to the criticism of GamerGate, a movement in which he seems to belong.

How does his statement not pertain to GamerGate?

Smiliomaniac specified "gamers", not "gamergaters", and the poster he was responding to addressed both gamers and gamergaters, and in the thread both comments were made in refers to the gaming community in general.

This was in a thread that had NOTHING to do with feminism.

Two comments, neither of which are about feminism, in a thread of 521 comments that has nothing to do with feminism, is proof of significant feminism bashing?

Laurie Penny is referred to as a feminist but that's also how she chooses to define herself (literally the third word in on her twitter profile), and anita sarkeesian is the butt of a joke, but what else is new? You can bash people who are feminists without criticizing feminism.

 

[delroland]

It is a solution. You just don't like it.

You have yet to explain how it would solve anything, how is it a solution?

1) Smiliomaniac is in all likelihood a GamerGater.

2) He posted in a thread that is currently discussing GamerGate, responding to the statement that GamerGate needs to do more than speak of its diversity.

3) He made an anti-feminist remark in his response to the criticism of GamerGate, a movement in which he seems to belong.

How does his statement not pertain to GamerGate?

Smiliomaniac specified "gamers", not "gamergaters", and the poster he was responding to addressed both gamers and gamergaters, and in the thread both comments were made in refers to the gaming community in general.

This was in a thread that had NOTHING to do with feminism.

Two comments, neither of which are about feminism, in a thread of 521 comments that has nothing to do with feminism, is proof of significant feminism bashing?

Laurie Penny is referred to as a feminist but that's also how she chooses to define herself (literally the third word in on her twitter profile), and anita sarkeesian is the butt of a joke, but what else is new? You can bash people who are feminists without criticizing feminism.

I love how every response you've made to every point I've made boils down to, "Nuh uh!"

"Nuh uh! That's not a solution! I'm talking about REAL solutions!"

To require a solution is to infer a problem. So I ask you, what is the problem that GamerGate is having that warrants the need for the solution you requested? I understood it to be the negative reputation GamerGate is receiving because its leaderless format has allowed toxic members in the group to tarnish GamerGate as a whole, thus detracting from their message and goals, to which leaving and forming a new organization is absolutely a solution that could fix the problem.

"Nuh uh! A GamerGater making anti-feminist remarks has nothing to do with GamerGate as a whole!"

"Nuh uh! Thirty anti-feminist posts aren't enough of a minority to be considered significant! And those posts aren't even anti-feminist enough to be considered anti-feminist! Plus the woman being slandered only SAYS she's a feminist!"

Why can't you simply admit there is a vocal anti-feminist minority in GamerGate?

You can bash people who are feminists without criticizing feminism.

I repeat this quote as it represents the oldest rationalization for bigotry in the history of civilization. Do you understand that bashing someone is negative, and criticizing them is positive?

 

[VanQ]

The problem is not everyone reports it and the amount of, again; WoW players, players is so big that monetoring it all live is practically impossible.

But as you said in the start of your post. He is talking for a good cause and let's hope people can be "kind and respectful". Not only in games, but IRL as well!

Be well and have a good evening everyone on the Escapist!

I think the problem is more underlying than that. I think that WoW promotes, at a fundamental and mechanical level, a very low regard for other players /as people/ that makes such misbehavior inevitable beyond the background noise of basic human jackassery.

I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. If you want to get far in WoW at all, you need to be able to play well with other player. Sure, if you waste your time in LFR or unorganized PvP all the time you'll probably run into jackasses that don't care about the game or other players. But if you want to experience proper raid content or organized PvP you better have a disposition that other people get along with.

WoW is a team player game by design. There's a lot to do solo but if you want to be competitive you're stuck with no choice but to get along with other players. The game rewards players that play together well far more than any single player going around being a douchebag will ever imagine he could achieve.

 

[delroland]

The problem is not everyone reports it and the amount of, again; WoW players, players is so big that monetoring it all live is practically impossible.

But as you said in the start of your post. He is talking for a good cause and let's hope people can be "kind and respectful". Not only in games, but IRL as well!

Be well and have a good evening everyone on the Escapist!

I think the problem is more underlying than that. I think that WoW promotes, at a fundamental and mechanical level, a very low regard for other players /as people/ that makes such misbehavior inevitable beyond the background noise of basic human jackassery.

I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. If you want to get far in WoW at all, you need to be able to play well with other player. Sure, if you waste your time in LFR or unorganized PvP all the time you'll probably run into jackasses that don't care about the game or other players. But if you want to experience proper raid content or organized PvP you better have a disposition that other people get along with.

WoW is a team player game by design. There's a lot to do solo but if you want to be competitive you're stuck with no choice but to get along with other players.

I feel you're being disingenuous to casual players. I love WoW, and I'm not some anti-social basement jockey, but I don't have the time or interest to join a raiding guild. LFR is plenty enough raid content for me to get the story aspects of the game. In fact, I have found raiding guilds to be much more stressful than more casual guilds, as the pressure to succeed often taints the relationships of its members.

 

[VanQ]

I feel you're being disingenuous to casual players. I love WoW, and I'm not some anti-social basement jockey, but I don't have the time or interest to join a raiding guild. LFR is plenty enough raid content for me to get the story aspects of the game. In fact, I have found raiding guilds to be much more stressful than more casual guilds, as the pressure to succeed often taints the relationships of its members.

Not everyone in LFR is a jackass, but that is the environment where the majority of the jackasses are. I'm sure you've witnessed it first hand. Frankly speaking though, the desire to succeed in a guild is what tends to bring them together, in my experience. It's hard not to get along with your guildmates after bringing down a boss that you've had 250 wipes on before. Adversity brings people together, the Determination buff does not.

I also do a lot of PuG runs in higher difficulty levels and if someone is an intolerant moron or asshole I can remove them from the group. We can enjoy the higher level content in a space that I deem safe for the people under my lead. It requires 5 people just to initiate a vote kick in LFR and then a majority ruling for that vote kick to pass. For organized play, all it takes is one person saying that they feel uncomfortable, then I can tell them to act maturely or face a kick as from me, the raid leader.

Then again, if you're only in WoW for the story, one trip through LFR is is enough to see that. I'm there for the gameplay, the challenge and the amazing people, story comes second to me in MMOs.

 

[UberPubert]

I love how every response you've made to every point I've made boils down to, "Nuh uh!"

I will entertain the notion that a more wordy response will suffice.

"Nuh uh! That's not a solution! I'm talking about REAL solutions!"

It just so happens that I am actually interested in finding a real solution, but so far all you've suggested is an alternative to gamergate because of how you and others perceive it to be distasteful and while I won't disagree that many people share that sentiment I'm not convinced that simply starting another movement will address these problems, especially not when I find - like in this topic - that the same accusations are being laid at the feet of the entire gaming community.

Any movement made by gamers, for gamers, is going to face these same accusations, and I hypothesize the capitulation of Gamergate will only make them worse. After all, why would the movement disband if the accusations about it being about toxic misogyny were false?

"Nuh uh! A GamerGater making anti-feminist remarks has nothing to do with GamerGate as a whole!"

Why is this so difficult to understand? If Gamergate isn't about feminism - as has been stated repeatedly by members of the movement - then why would anti-feminist statements from a smaller subset of people claiming to be part of the movement be matter? Gamergate is not defined by a handful of statements, it's defined by it's majority, that's how a movement without official membership or leadership works. Without evidence that a significant amount of Gamergate is anti-feminist, it is unreasonable to assume that the movement is.

I don't even have any issue with people who do make anti-feminist statements, I think there can be valid criticism of feminism. But I don't think that's what Gamergate is about, and I certainly haven't seen any evidence of that.

"Nuh uh! Thirty anti-feminist posts aren't enough of a minority to be considered significant! And those posts aren't even anti-feminist enough to be considered anti-feminist! Plus the woman being slandered only SAYS she's a feminist!"

Bashing and criticizing people belonging to a movement does not equate to doing the same to the movement. And no, thirty posts are not enough when there's over five hundred posts in the thread, especially when that's not what the thread is even about, and I still don't buy that they're anti-feminist

Why can't you simply admit there is a vocal anti-feminist minority in GamerGate?

It doesn't matter if there's an anti-feminist minority in Gamergate, it doesn't even matter if there was a anti-feminist majority in Gamergate, because feminism isn't what Gamergate is about. Someone can be anti-feminist and pro-gamergate, just like someone can be feminist and pro-gamergate, but that doesn't change anything about what Gamergate is.

 

[Popido]

You know why its called GamerGATE? Because its scandal, like Watergate.

I'm curious why people constantly talk about GamerGate as a movement. Can it even be considered as a movement? For example, is supporting an Kickstarter project, making you part of a movement? Should backers be then considered as a movement members? If they decide to go around promoting the kickstarter to get more people involved and discuss increasing their funds, are they not considered as organized movement?

How far can we push crowdfunding before it becomes a movement? What if, instead of transferring money directly from bank accounts, every backer got off their asses and marched in masses to the developers studio to hand them cashes? Now you have to call it a movement. But is GamerGate then a movement, when everybody is still sitting on their asses.

 

[C.S.Strowbridge]

You know when somebody has to point out their own neutrality it really speaks volumes about how 1 side is clearly no better than the other side its villified.

Or they really don't like GamerGaters, but don't want to say so for fear of getting crap on.

 

[Haru17]

"Hey... hey guys... maybe, I dunno, you could stop being dicks... just a little? please?"