GamerGate's Image Problem

[Alex1508]

I'll let others give the rundown on Milo, yea he's pretty much the only one, hence the tolerance he receives.

Yeah, and the harassment, abuse and doxxing attacks he is getting. Don't forget to mention that too.

People on a gaming forum were talking about wanting him fired, for investigating this story. Isn't that a bit much?

Pretty much part of the course with anyone involved in this entire mess. It's funny really how each side claims they are the one true voice of justice and yet they use the exact same tactics.

Have the people on the other side of gamer game admitted that their people are doing this and apologized for it?

Your side certainly didn't to my knowledge.

Wasn't there a petition from the gamers side of things to stop all harassment?

Here it is.

http://www.change.org/p/the-gaming-industry-please-stop-the-hate

That's some acknowledgement at least. I signed that myself too.

Yeah that's a very nice thing to do and i will sign it myself but ultimately if this movemnt wants to paint the other side by the actions of their extremists i think it's a fair thing to do the same. Let's be honest here when the ppl who started the whole thing basically act like this http://puu.sh/boAEC/f072f259b6.txt and yes i read all of it.


Aug 25 07.18.18 Any chance we can get Zoe to commit suicide?
Aug 25 07.18.29 if we can get more daming evidence
Aug 25 07.18.29 I think the [doxxing info removed by DF] is a good shot.
Aug 25 07.18.33 like her fucking a train of lack dudes ?
Aug 25 07.18.39 fuck off Logan
Aug 25 07.18.39 black
Aug 25 07.18.51 Nah 21st century doing a train is so 90s. ?
Aug 25 07.18.59 If she commits suicide we lose everything ?
Aug 25 07.20.34 If you can?t see how driving Zoe to suicide would fuck this entire thing up then you?re a fucking idiot
Aug 25 07.20.41 Imagine the kotaku article ?
Aug 25 07.20.48 PaperDinosaur is right
Aug 25 07.20.51 not the right PR play


not the right PR play.....

Oh my god, that is horrible. That's as bad as this.

https://twitter.com/EvilBobDALMYT/status/506139318713581569/photo/1

People on both sides need to stop doing this shit to each other. We are all people.

I agree but... actually, you know what, scuse me for a sec, i will go on a rant here, i think it's due time to put everything on the table.....also i hope i don't get infracted for this.

RANT MODE ON

Well if you want me to be completely pedantic, that's one tweet vs 3756 pages, in 10-point btw and about 4778 entries where Zoe is mentioned, each one of the entries being more or less like the one i posted. On the other hand when it comes to the corruption issue Nathan is mentioned 108 times and "ethics" and "ethical" combined yeld 146 entries. Pretty one sided don't you think; puts things in perspective.

As far as i'm concerned i really wish the gamergate ppl would stop presenting themselves as this gang of freedom fighters against the big bad SJWs overlords and the corrupt gaming media......yeah, nope, they are not, they are just sticking it up to the SJWs who "invaded" their games with all this "mad political correctness" of treating minority characters with more consideration than being the punchline of a horrible joke.

From what i've seen they are just as bad as the ppl they claim they rallied against just with a better PR department ( heh...not the right PR play amirite) thanks to the other side actually portraying themselves poorly via their censoring on major sites and the exposure of their cronyism, while they hide theirs in hard to read, gigantic document dumps or straight out deleting incriminating evidence.Though tbh imo the last one is more because the owner of the server banks doesn?t want to risk getting sued over somebody using 4chan as a base for recruiting folks for raids and doxxing attempts. Especially now with the FBI investigation that Anita started over her harrassement and death treaths.

And about their PR, tbh i'm really sick and tired of them coopting the #notyourshield movement and the TFYC and using them, ironically enough, as their shields whenever anyone mentions the rather worrying trends of sexism, racism and homophobia that do appear among their ranks. Also i'm personally having a good laugh when they try to push everything under the rug, with the good old "they are just extremists" trope just like their SJW counterparts do. Lovely double standard isn't it.

Or the always lovely "we are here just to play videogames", "they are just videogames", "or keep politics out of my videogames" little quips. Lovely how that pops up everytime anyone tries to bring up any criticism over the rather dubious representations of controversial topics in videogames. Don't think about what you are playing and what they are presenting just keep playing. See? Vivian James tells you so *nods head* don't think about their agenda just our agenda pffff ......and i still don't know what to think about their mascot, considering its color scheme is based on an old internet meme about Vegeta raping Piccolo.

So scuse me, i don't stand for the corruption and nepotism that has wrought the videogame industry but sure as hell i won't stand for this movement if this is how it's gonna be. As far as i'm concerned, if i have to choose between the death of a thousand cuts or a slow and agonizing death via poison, at the end of the day i choose none and ,in my opinion, whoever wins games will be worse off because of it. I would be really surprised if the opposite happens.

RANT MODE OFF

 

[Ilovechocolatemilk]

Saying GamerGate has an image problem is like saying a protest has an image problem. When individuals get together in massive numbers because they've all been wronged in some way, they can't exactly tailor their image the way a highly visible individual like Ben Kuchera can.

There is no leadership in GamerGate, ergo, there's no identity. Furthermore, even if there were, it's not something that can be fixed because who would you charge with fixing it? Everything that arises from GamerGate does so organically, in a grassroots fashion.

 

[themilo504]

I think a large amount of the problems that gamergate faces is that gamergate doesn't actually exist, this is not some grand coalition of people united against a common opponent, this is a bunch of people that should not be on the same side of any issue, united pretty much only by a hashtag.

"this is not some grand coalition of people united against a common opponent".

This is exactly what gamer gate is. A grand coalition of gamers of all ages, races, genders, sexuality, who have come together to stand up to being called racists, sexists, homophobes, worse than terrorists etc, by people who make their living thanks to us.

We came together organically. Didn't need to be organised. Without someone telling us what to do, we all joined up to fight for simply not being insulted, because we happen to have a hobby that is playing games.

"this is a bunch of people that should not be on the same side of any issue, united pretty much only by a hashtag"

We are united by our passion for games. Why do you say a bunch of people that shouldn't be on the same side of any issues? What do you mean with that?

It’s not a grand coalition because almost everybody has their own goal, some people want better games journalism, others want games journalism to become less left wing, others want to put an end to social justice warriors, and others just want to take zoe down, Those people should not be on the same side of this debate because they don?t actually agree with each other about this issue.

 

[Akjosch]

It’s not a grand coalition because almost everybody has their own goal, some people want better games journalism, others want games journalism to become less left wing, others want to put an end to social justice warriors, and others just want to take zoe down, Those people should not be on the same side of this debate because they don?t actually agree with each other about this issue.

Those people are also adult individuals and can decide for themselves on which side, if any, of a debate they stand.

 

[VVThoughtBox]

Aren't gaming journalists and the Social Justice crowd hypocrites? Something about the way that the journalists and SJW activists have been acting the past couple of weeks seems contradictory. They're accusing their target audience of lack of diversity, but many of these journalists and SJW are predominately white middle class people between the ages of 21 and 34, who engage in sexist behavior. You can't really call yourself a feminist and then shame a female video game characters like Mai Shiranui, Morrigan, or Felicia for not living up to your improbable standards.

While I imagine such people exist, I haven't really heard the argument that those characters "shouldn't exist" or otherwise be shamed for, I presume from your implication, being sexualized. There isn't any sort of ethical "problem" with a woman being depicted as attractive, such as it is, and creators are free to make the games they want the way they want.

Mind you, I would argue that it is indicative of a broader problem that, while men in games can be short, tall, fat, thin, ugly, bald, hairy, whathaveyou, but women tend to only exist in a sort of "standard attractive female" template. Like I'm sure you could easily name a dozen fat male characters off the top of your head, but for women the list sort of begins and ends with Ellie from BL2, and she's an NPC. Not that I'm saying the solution is we need more fat women in games per se, as there are no easy fixes, just that their absence is indicative of a larger problem.

Also, saying "SJWs make lazy generalizations, but watch as I do the same to them" isn't exactly taking the ethical high-ground. I'd ask if you had any numbers to go on for your blanket assertion, but even if you did it wouldn't prove very much.

I cannot speak for a lot of gamers on this issue, I can only speak for myself. There is no such thing as "standard attractive female", it's just a very negative assumption made up by people who don't understand art at all. The concept of beauty is very subjective and it all boils down to the artist's style and preferences. There are lots of artists on the internet who draw women fat, pregnant, inflated, or bloated, but they have to hide it because other people might not find women with these features attractive. The person who don't like these features will usually say that a fat woman, or a pregnant woman, or inflated is disgusting, or how anyone can find that attractive. The people who are calling for more varied body proportions in female characters aren't looking for diversity, they just want an idealized version of themselves.

 

[kyp275]

Well if you want me to be completely pedantic, that's one tweet vs 3756 pages, in 10-point btw and about 4778 entries where Zoe is mentioned, each one of the entries being more or less like the one i posted. On the other hand when it comes to the corruption issue Nathan is mentioned 108 times and "ethics" and "ethical" combined yeld 146 entries. Pretty one sided don't you think; puts things in perspective.

First off, you are likely including the posts that span several pages where people who are intentionally coming into derail basically go "God why won't you stop talking about ----!???", at which point people will quote that person and point out that they're the one who brought it up, and which point they'll go "No I didn't why do you keep bring up ----?!".

This can go on for page or two before people finally get the hint that they're being derailed and/or the Mods ban that person.

Second, are you really going to say we just have a single tweet? I mean I know you're ranting but have some intellectual honesty.

http://gamergateharassment.tumblr.com/

Can add this to that:

https://twitter.com/milky_candy/status/513334111344537600

But of course, only GG would doxx and threaten women IRL and say stuff like "I know where you live" and "I know who your family is".

As an aside, and in a doomed attempt to try and bring this back to the original topic, I'm becoming of the opinion that Leigh Alexander is about to be dubbed Literally Who #3, in that it lately feels like they can't shut up about her, but might yet realize that, much like Zoe and Anita, it's problematic to their public image to be seen fixating on her, but since they can't stop themselves, they'll start using the nickname in the hopes of fooling anyone at all. Maybe I'm talking out my ass, maybe my psychic radar is acting up again, just a hunch is all.

You know, it's not good when you want people to shut up. Do you support Leigh Alexander's article "Gamers are dead" and her promise to destroy a career of a female developer?

Spoiler

I know you lot would really like people to shut up and not to bring this issue. I'd say when you have an influential gaming blogger like Leigh Alexander as one of the faces of gaming blogging, it's not really positive public image.

See, it's this need to demonize the enemy that's unhealthy to the "movement." What kind of discussion can "me and my lot" even have with you now you're this crazy on the warpath? "Yes, I support her threatening to destroy a person's career?" And what do you even mean supporting her article? Does she have a right to her opinion? Do I need to agree with it, and with the offense you've chosen to take over it, in order to support it?

Or better yet, don't answer that. I don't really care either way but nothing you've thus far demonstrated suggests we're capable of having a reasonable discussion, treating one another as equals. I'm going to bed, it's damn-ass late here.

Or you can just simply answer the question, which is something that I rarely see from people like you. It's as if it would physically pains you if you had to say that people on your side also says bad things.

Meanwhile, people like you have absolutely no problem pointing to random twitter messages spewing vitirol and go "Look, this is what GG people are like, this is what they're about!!!"

But when the positions are reversed, you just go "why are you guys on a warpath???" and then bob and weave as hard as you can to avoid having to actually call out your own, while at the same time saying GG supporters are terrible because there are some terrible people in GG.

By that logic, all you anti-GG people would be hypocritical misandrists and racists, because there are those type in your group.

 

[Camel]

Oh, uh, why hullo there, abruptly fractured conversation from 8 hours ago, how've you been?

I don't really see your problem, but you're evidently frustrated with what?

Short response as I'm about to go to bed: I read the Breitbart article, and the referenced emails, and didn't reach anything like the same conclusion you did. And I'm not the only one, and, law of averages, we're possibly not all of us evil for failing to do so.

As sympathetic as I am to the horrible harassment Zoe faced, I think this incident has raised enough questions about the incestuous relationship between press and developers already.
- Jason Schreier, Kotaku

I would prefer not to be associated with this. It feels wrong to me. I think it feels very off to reach across the fence from journalist to subject in this way. I prefer professional distance, especially given the accusations being levied at us from outside.
- Mike Futter, Game Informer

Will you comment or ignore these two e-mails? Two game bloggers say:

1) There is "the incestuous relationship between press and developers.
2) "It feels wrong to me. I prefer professional distance, especially given the accusations being levied at us from outside."

Also, and I didn't want to bring up Milo again, but the relevant fact is that he did misrepresent the SFPD position. The rep said she couldn't find the case, and Milo interpreted that as confirmation she never called, and went public with it as well as personal attacks without seeking further clarification. Grossly unprofessional.

Your theories are nice but not really convincing.

See, it's this need to demonize the enemy that's unhealthy to the "movement." What kind of discussion can "me and my lot" even have with you now you're this crazy on the warpath? "Yes, I support her threatening to destroy a person's career?" And what do you even mean supporting her article? Does she have a right to her opinion? Do I need to agree with it, and with the offense you've chosen to take over it, in order to support it?

Or better yet, don't answer that. I don't really care either way but nothing you've thus far demonstrated suggests we're capable of having a reasonable discussion, treating one another as equals. I'm going to bed, it's damn-ass late here.

Ha-ha-hah. it was you who used an expression "you lot" when talking to me. When I use "you lot" when talking to you it's suddenly became a "demonization of the enemy"! Yeah, using your expression "you lot" in a dialog with you also suggests that "I'm incapable of having a reasonable discussion"! I'm a terrible terrible person.

Your second point is a pretty naked attempt to try and derail the conversation. As to your first, what evidence exactly? I mean assuming we're agreed that the bit last week where he misrepresented the SFPD in order to rile everyone up over Sarkeesian again was outright wrong of him, what else is there? In nearly a month the only thing he's "uncovered" is the mailing list, and reading the emails doesn't really support the idea of industry-wide collusion that you lot have been on about for all this time, not even if you only read the ones he cherry-picked for you. What exactly is there to bother with refuting?

Yeah, and you still didn't address Leigh Alexander's threat to end a career of a female developer. You also don't want to discuss her article "Gamers are dead". Basically you sidestep to discuss any difficult topic.

 

[Camel]

Just gonna say "Gamers are wierd-dorky-rapists" is slightly more off putting. Though Milo apologized so evidently its fine. So tolerant GG.

Would also point out that Leigh Alexander could leave tomorrow and I doubt it it would really impact anything.

If Milo left...well...Thank goodness GG is so forgiving, since that man can barely go a week without saying or doing something stupid.

I know this tactic - "I can't defend something, so instead I will attack a completely different subject!" Try harder. So, are you okay with a threat of Leigh Alexander to end a career of a female developer? Is it okay to write "Gamers are dead"?

 

[Happiness Assassin]

Spoiler: Spoiled for image size

Wonder if this is going to make the rounds. This is fucking unacceptable.

 

[Richard Keohane]

The biggest image problem is that the misogyny was the rally banner for #Gamergate. Not OVERT misogyny. Not "ALL WOMEN ARE CUNTZ WHO DESERVE TO DIEE!!!!111!1". The image problem was that this issue of broken journalistic integrity has been HUGE for years. Decades even. And no one did anything until a guy started trying to tear down his ex for cheating on him.

My question is, where were you white knights of videogaming when we needed you? Where were you when Jeff Gerstmann was fired for writing an honest review? Where were you when we were adding "Bullshot" to our vocabulary? Where were you when Eidos was openly manipulating metacritic, or when in 2004 Warner Brothers made influencing metacritic part of the contract for licensed games? We've had problems for decades, and the big, galvanizing event was a woman doing something wrong, only she didn't, at all, it was all based on lies.

You can't tell me this isn't about misogyny, because people only cared when it was a woman accused doing something wrong. For more reading on how to rally a movement based on covertly appealing to your base's hatreds, read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy.

 

[AkaDad]

I don't think anti-feminism is a key issue in the least so much as anti-moral authority posturing under the guise of feminism. And it is because of that I would answer no to the second one as well. I have talked to a lot of people because of this, and it seems every time I talk to them about this, even if they rabidly hate "SJW" types, it is very easy to help them see that it is not those promoting social advocacy that are the ones they have a problem with, but rather those who abuse the causes to manipulate and manufacture outrage.

Hell, posted in the main thread, this sort of sums that up entirely.

Fun fact, the first, second and fourth feminist 'movements' all failed because they caused exactly what that guy said in that post. They acted in such a terrible manner that everyone got pissed off. Apparently that's a really bad way to gain support. Hell, if it wasn't for the extremely liberal stance because created by much of the youth in the 60s, the third feminist movement would have failed pretty damn hard too. Feminists groups are useless movements, who never help anyone, and hurt as many as they can, women the most. And whether or not there is good feminists or the majority are good, the movements always have caused more problems because exactly what that post states.

Wow. And let me guess, you don't have proof for any of this (Especially the existence of a 'fourth feminist movement')

Tell me HOW exactly feminists are pissing people off huh?

I can answer the last one from my own perspective. By telling me that I hate women, because I play video games. That one is annoying. But I am not sure that who is saying that is even a feminist. A real feminist wouldn't try to divide people, but instead try to bring them together.

Another one is that so called feminists hate men and can hold this opinion publicly, without any repercussions from society. Hating a sex makes you a sexist, not a feminist. But again, that one is not a real feminist either. I guess it's better to say that feminist impersonators are pissing people off, instead of that real feminists are doing that.

Nobody is saying that you hate women because you play video games. Who is saying this? I have yet to see any of this from anywhere.

I am too sleepy to even attempt to understand what you are getting at with your second bit.

Do you go on other gaming sites? Or do you only go to this site?

If you are too sleepy we can talk later if you wanna.

I am a freakin' news hound man. I read all the mainstream Game news websites (Kotaku, Destructoid, RPS, Escapist Magazine, Memebase sometimes etc. I don't read Polygon for some reason.) On top of that I view Countless Youtube Videos in an effort to find critical thought about video games: Errant Signal, those Critical Proximity Videos, the works by Anita Sarkessian, Super Bunny Hop.

I also love to read about critique of video game culture. Such as the articles featured on Cracked.com or forum posts on SomethingAwful.com (or those Flash Tubs by Shmorky or his old comics which are probably the most biting, scathing critique of gamer culture ever made) or those really weird animations by hotdiggydemon (Wacky Game Jokez, 4 Kidz!). OR just all kinds of articles and videos across many websites that address issues in gamer culture.

But what I am trying to get at, myself being a stereotypical white hardcore gamer with a zuuped up PC and MMORPG subscription Cannot FATHOM why gamers are so upset at anything at all. I've been reading and listening to this stuff for years, its stuff written by gamers. All these supposed 'SJWs' are probably hardcore gamers or love video games.

Though, one thing I must note: I don't use twitter, I don't 'use' youtube. (like habitually watch videos aside fomr UCTV lectures and junk).

I have yet to even see an article explicitly snarl out "All gamers are sexist!" but what I have seen is more along the lines of: "Is there a problem with sexism in video games?/Video Game culture/Video Game Industry?" and then proceed to give their own thoughts which given their arguments they tend to be 'Yes to a certain degree'

My only assumption now is that there is someone out there telling gamers that they are horrible misogynists or something for playing video games. But its not the games journalists.

That's strange. I found at least 2 of those articles on the first page of a google search.

http://theweek.com/article/index/267333/how-to-stop-misogynists-from-terrorizing-the-world-of-gamers

http://badassdigest.com/2014/08/26/video-games-misogyny-and-terrorism-a-guide-to-assholes/

Do the sites you visit have articles about gamers raising money for charities?

I just fully read both those articles you linked and nowhere in there did they say all gamers are sexist, misogynistic pigs.

No article I've read has said that and yet some people are throwing temper tantrums because they can't read properly or they can and are using it as way push whatever agenda they have.

Unless you're an asshole, those articles aren't talking about you.

Edit: Does the Child's Play charity count?

 

[Alex1508]

Well if you want me to be completely pedantic, that's one tweet vs 3756 pages, in 10-point btw and about 4778 entries where Zoe is mentioned, each one of the entries being more or less like the one i posted. On the other hand when it comes to the corruption issue Nathan is mentioned 108 times and "ethics" and "ethical" combined yeld 146 entries. Pretty one sided don't you think; puts things in perspective.

First off, you are likely including the posts that span several pages where people who are intentionally coming into derail basically go "God why won't you stop talking about ----!???", at which point people will quote that person and point out that they're the one who brought it up, and which point they'll go "No I didn't why do you keep bring up ----?!".

This can go on for page or two before people finally get the hint that they're being derailed and/or the Mods ban that person.

Second, are you really going to say we just have a single tweet? I mean I know you're ranting but have some intellectual honesty.

http://gamergateharassment.tumblr.com/

Ofc it's not just one tweet, it's an evergrowing mountain of damning evidence but then again it's the same on the other side as well. Same sides of the same coin but with different flavours. I really wonder why this movement didn't explode during the "Dorritogate" back in the day when their grievances were right there in the front for everybody to see.....nope it was the sexual shenanigans of a self proclaimed SJW that sparked it. Meh, as far as i'm concerned this was my opinion on the whole "why does gamergate have an image problem" thing, basically everything. I'm all for a better games media and exposing the nepotism but unfortunately this is only the "official version" of the mission. This is just a battle inbetween the forces of "political correctness" and the "anti-political correctness" and as such, it doesn't matter which side wins, in the end it's the same for me.

Meh, i'm going back in my bunker, maybe get out somtimes when it's snowing. Nuclear winter can be quite pretty.

 

[runic knight]

The biggest image problem is that the misogyny was the rally banner for #Gamergate. Not OVERT misogyny. Not "ALL WOMEN ARE CUNTZ WHO DESERVE TO DIEE!!!!111!1". The image problem was that this issue of broken journalistic integrity has been HUGE for years. Decades even. And no one did anything until a guy started trying to tear down his ex for cheating on him.

My question is, where were you white knights of videogaming when we needed you? Where were you when Jeff Gerstmann was fired for writing an honest review? Where were you when we were adding "Bullshot" to our vocabulary? Where were you when Eidos was openly manipulating metacritic, or when in 2004 Warner Brothers made influencing metacritic part of the contract for licensed games? We've had problems for decades, and the big, galvanizing event was a woman doing something wrong, only she didn't, at all, it was all based on lies.

You can't tell me this isn't about misogyny, because people only cared when it was a woman accused doing something wrong. For more reading on how to rally a movement based on covertly appealing to your base's hatreds, read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy.

We have been there the whole time. Do you forget the uproar about Gerstman? Did the DoritoPope thing not happen? The difference between then and now was that those incidents were seen as isolated, localized to one source and we had the other sources covering it. This though? this never had a source in mainstream willing to cover the story at all, so people investigated. When they did, censorship and insults rained down from the people we expected to cover the story.

This was never about hatred of women, regardless how much you want to spin it otherwise. The people upset now, many were upset about previous examples but put their trust in the overall journalistic system to take care of it. This was the first time we saw that it was corrupt as deep as it is. This was the massive backlash and censorship caught in the act.

No, the reason this is different in how people respond has nothing to do with Zoe being a woman. It has everything to do with the overwhelmingly hostile and underhanded response received. f they ran a simple story saying it was investigated, this would have never happened and I am sure the majority of people would agree it would never have blown up like it did. And that right there tells us that no, it isn't about "she is women" but rather the reacting this event sparked. Had people been meet with such hostility on a wide scale, such open censorship during any of the previous examples, it could have easily blown up then too.

 

[entelechy]

So, I had been composing replies to a bunch of posts in this thread, but the DDoS attack ate them, and I don't care to restart lest the attacks resume.

That being said, I want to unequivocally condemn whomever is responsible for these attacks, regardless of their identity or motivation. This is not OK, full stop.

 

[aliengmr]

Just gonna say "Gamers are wierd-dorky-rapists" is slightly more off putting. Though Milo apologized so evidently its fine. So tolerant GG.

Would also point out that Leigh Alexander could leave tomorrow and I doubt it it would really impact anything.

If Milo left...well...Thank goodness GG is so forgiving, since that man can barely go a week without saying or doing something stupid.

I know this tactic - "I can't defend something, so instead I will attack a completely different subject!" Try harder. So, are you okay with a threat of Leigh Alexander to end a career of a female developer? Is it okay to write "Gamers are dead"?

I honestly don't really care what Leigh or Milo says, you are the one getting offended by someone's opinion, not me. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy.

Why is it her words you have such a problem with, and not his? <-----that's your imagine problem. By all means keep going after her, it means absolutely nothing. Seriously, I don't actually have to defend her. This is not the two sided conflict you made yourself believe.

Protip: When feigning outrage over perceived insults, try and make sure the most visible among you haven't said much worse. It causes people to really not give a shit when you bring it up.

 

[RexMundane]

Post I wrote hours ago before the DDOS:

Didn't the police officer give the wrong information though? I thought that Milo guy corrected himself after receiving the right information. Didn't that happen?

I hate re-addressing this over and over, particularly since it seems so few will listen, but short answer, no. Officer Esparza of the SFPD said he couldn't, at the time of the email, find any information about the case. Milo claimed, as a result, that this was "confirmation" of his pre-conceived notion, that there was no case, and that Anita lied about filing the police report.

SFPD: I've researched the incident and thus far unable to locate any information on the alleged incident.

M.Y.: SFPD has confirmed to me that it received no complaint from Anita Sarkeesian in August, as she claims.

Spoiler

[img src=http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/cant+stop+the+happening+train+_092140_5290900.png][/spoiler]

One officer says he personally can't find case information, and Milo claims that as proof positive from the entire department there is no case. Milo's defenders tend to fall back on "well that's what they told him at the time," as a defense for this embarassment, and it patently wasn't.

Yet even if it were, that wouldn't excuse failing to find corroborating sources, trying to speak to the people involved, just plain waiting a little while longer, etc., before making any statement at all, much less pointing and screaming "Liar!", publically mocking his target, and throwing himself a party on 4chan.

He did tweet 18 hrs later to make the correction, yes, omitting the hashtag as he did, and without admitting his mistake or apologizing for it, and while still trying to question "the merits of her complaints."

Optimistic conclusion from all this, if he's not actively being malicious and false, then he's just plain awful at the basics of his job.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

You can't tell me this isn't about misogyny, because people only cared when it was a woman accused doing something wrong. For more reading on how to rally a movement based on covertly appealing to your base's hatreds, read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy.

It's not about misogyny. It was the straw that broke the camel's back.
People have been talking shit about game's journalism for years. Feminist-SJW rhetoric and apologism have been going on for years.

The only reason this blew up is because people EVERYWHERE were being censored, meaning you weren't allowed to even talk about this. The only reason the original Escapist thread was allowed to be up was because Greg Tito didn't follow the request by the other people at JournoPro. Meanwhile, reddit, 4chan, and people other websites were censored for talking about it, huge abuse of power. Look up Streisand Effect.

GamerGate and Five Guys would have died in less than 2 weeks if:
1. No one had been censored.
2. Journalists had DONE THEIR JOB and reported on the whole thing instead of trying to paint this thing as misogynist plot.

By Quinn's own definition she raped Eron. Eron posted proof.
Phil Fish bullied his friend into silence, why? For daring to say that Quinn MOLESTED HIM.

Journalists didn't care.

Yet, when a male developer was accused of rape, journalists were all over it.
It's a huge double standard. I want to know why it's there.

Imagine if Zoe was a man who had done the same things, and no one was allowed to talk about it. Wouldn't that be fucked up?

 

[RexMundane]

People wonder "Why now is the explosion this big, compared to the others in the past?", some implying "must be misogyny".

But for those who are genuinely asking, the answer is quite simple, and has yet to be refuted; The Streissand Effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

For an analogy, here is an article on Vulcanism:
http://www.answers.com/Q/How_does_a_volcano_erupt

The vent of the volcano might also be blocked, causing the magma to force its way out, thus causing a huge explosion.

GG keeps saying the whole FiveGuys thing was the vagina that broke the camel's back in all this, but seriously, why? Just a couple months ago UbiSoft was handing out XPeria tablets to reviewers of Watch_Dogs. You couldn't ask for a more clear-cut case of potential bribery, and nary a peep. People didn't look at the relative silence and say it was a Secret Cabal of Ultra-Censors trying to Manipulate Games Media, but with Quinn they did, and are giving the impression that this whole month-long ordeal is to give them the right to call a woman they never met a whore. I mean free speech and all that, but an online forum that doesn't want to be part of a fomenting rage ball directed at one woman's sex life has the right to put a stop to it. It's like they're crying "Streisand" over not being allowed to form a lynch mob in a specific place, as though they're "obligated" somehow to let them shout expletive until their CapsLock breaks.

 

[RexMundane]

I think you're misconstruing the idea of "silence" with "gagging".

And in either case, the silence you claim over the Watchdogs incident is a complete lie:
http://wolfsgamingblog.com/2014/04/15/ubisoft-handed-out-free-nexus-7-tablets-to-watch-dogs-preview-event-attendees/
---

At this point you might as well claim that the Streisand Effect is misogynist because Barbara Streisand is a woman. GG doesn't keep bringing up -----, you do.

Oh, it was reported, and talked about, sure. Just no raging lynch mob calling for anyone's head, no following comment moderation to try and contain the blaze, etc. The Whole Dorito-pope thing, the Kane & Lynch & Gamespot thing, all got mentions and even got people riled up a bit for a couple days, discussions were had, and it died down.

Yet with this? People got just plain hideous over Zoe Quinn (and not, it bears acknowledging, Nathan Greyson, who if there were a scandal would be the one with actual power and therefore the villian) to such a massive degree that forum moderators had to intervene lest risk being complicit in what was rapidly becoming an online lynch mob. You say "Gagging" as though these people were actively prevented from going anywhere they wanted to discuss the finer points of how best to rape her to death in front of her family. They weren't being silenced, they were being told to take it outside.

 

[aliengmr]

runic

My way of defining Misogyny comes from more recent definitions of the word. Yes, it has meant hatred and still does but with the added "deep mistrust" part that was added only recently. I still think it is too strong of a word to describe things, but I don't make the words.

Jack Thompson. Yes, and quite a jerk he was. He was viciously attacked, and the defense against him was right. See he wanted to take your games, more over, he had the power to do it too. His hyperbolic ranting could have convinced legislators to censor games for the sake of the children. Not only was he an outsider, he was a genuine threat.

BUT, and its a big one...

Today good ole Jack could rant for hours and nothing could happen. The guy is powerless and the Supreme Court said as much. An event, it seems, so many gamers don't really care about. Maybe it was because the case wasn't about actually censoring games, I don't know. But the results are the same games are protected speech. This means something. It means games have a right not to be censored.

"Like the protected books, plays, and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas-and even social messages-through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot, and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player's interaction with the virtual world). That suffices to confer First Amendment protection."


Now, this is where we are now. Yes, on the surface, you are right both were reacted to equally. Except, Anita Sarkeesian made her videos in a time where her critique has no real power. She also had no inclination to censor anything and clearly explained that these tropes could still be used. Again, I'm pointing to the need rush in and counter her ascertains so vociferously when it wasn't really needed at all. Why does she have to be wrong? Why attack her at all?

Regardless of how either of us view the situation it doesn't change the result. By attacking her, Anita Sarkeesian's videos were validated and the industry's views were validated.

Listen, I know what you want from this movement many of us want the same things. But until you accept the fact that, from the outside, gender politics is deeply ingrained in the movement, you are just spinning your wheels. We may have to just agree to disagree.

In fact I really think now its just a fight against SJWs and that's it. The Escapist may have had the right idea in allowing people to talk about this, but was it good for GG? I'm starting not to think so. The message is buried under heaps and heaps of posts "from the front"

From what I can tell, the time has really passed. I mean unless someone stands up drops the tag and tries a different approach, nothing will ever get done. Gamergate is constructing its own enemies, that's not a good sign.