Has MovieBob been fired from ScrewAttack?

[Hades]

I think Bob is an interesting guy who often has interesting things to say. Its precisely because of this that its such a shame that Bob can often be so extreme in his opinion that he invalidates his own viewpoints.

Being against changing the Mass effect ending was fine but Bob went above and beyond, proudly proclaiming he never played mass effect but that he was still fully capable of rendering and that the people who hated the ending were a downright danger to the growth of the industry. All while missing the point of why those people were angry.

Being against gamergate is fine but calling everyone involved in it subhumans against whom there are no bad tactics is just nasty on his part. Things like that makes it hard to take Bob's opinion very seriously and yet he keeps acting like he alone is right.

There is also something another reviewer once said about him. According to Bob people can't ever just be wrong. They are often ''dangerous'' or sub human, or whatever.

 

[MiskWisk]

MovieBob cannot be mentioned, it seems, without the thread spiralling into a hate session.

A little ironic, given that the most commonly recurring complaint about the guy is that he couldn't keep his distaste for people out of unrelated topics.

Unfortunately, there is a qualifier in there that completely removes the irony from the situation. Namely the word, "unrelated." I think discussing MovieBob in his entirety on a thread about MovieBob and speculating whether or not he is still employed by Screw Attack is perfectly reasonable and expected.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

Just proof that you reap what you sow.

More to the point, it's indicative that people are unable or unwilling to adopt the standards they hold others to.

And what standard would that be? The standard that you should never dislike anyone for their actions and attitudes? Because that's not at all the standard people are holding him to. If not, then what? The posts in this thread aren't at all similar to the reasons why people dislike MovieBob.

As should be clear by all the posts in this thread, some from people who are even align with him politically on many issues, the reason many people find him absolutely intolerable is due to him having an extremely low threshold of dissent before he considers them sub-human scum. Now, everyone has some kind of threshold; I wouldn't expect people to tolerate those who think we should hang people for their skin color, or executing people for the gods they worship, and pretty much everyone has some kind of pet issue that will act as a deal breaker, but, good lord, Bob just takes it to a whole other level. He seems completely unable empathize with anyone who even slightly disagrees. He's basically the poster child for that age old paradox of "tolerance for all, except all those other scumbags who think differently".
There's a reason why the opinion here is all but unanimous.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

The worst part is, I see a lot of myself in him. I have the weird leftist views, lack of real friends, love of nerdy shit (and yeah, I dug his review of Street Sharks), so it's almost like staring at a dark twisted reflection of myself. One that writes people off as subhuman scum instead of trying to encourage them to change.

This is what annoyed me the most about him. I actually share a lot of his political beliefs and I almost feel like a worse person for it. People like him do more to tarnish what they believe in than make any progress of convincing others to share their position.

Right?!?! It's like he's walked out of Plato's cave, saw the real world, and instead of trying to help people still afraid to leave the cave, he wants to blow it up so it collapses on top of him.

It's truly what I despise him for. He's said in the past that he doesn't care about doing the right thing, the right way. That if he has to compromise his own integrity and do something bad to do something good he'd do it. Fuck him and his ends justify the means bullshit.

 

[Silvanus]

Unfortunately, there is a qualifier in there that completely removes the irony from the situation. Namely the word, "unrelated." I think discussing MovieBob in his entirety on a thread about MovieBob and speculating whether or not he is still employed by Screw Attack is perfectly reasonable and expected.

Well, it's a thread related to MovieBob, sure. But then, MovieBob's commentary usually has some connection with the topic at hand, too; it's just that people don't want him griping about personal dislikes.

And what standard would that be? The standard that you should never dislike anyone for their actions and attitudes? Because that's not at all the standard people are holding him to. If not, then what? The posts in this thread aren't at all similar to the reasons why people dislike MovieBob.

The standard of not hammering on personal animosities when the topic isn't how much you like/dislike something.

Criticism is well and good, and healthy; it was just an observation that it seems to reach a fever pitch around this one man. So very many people feeling the need to begin and end comments with how very much they hate him and the horse he rode in on, even though the topic is not about anything he's done, just about whether or not he still works somewhere.

As should be clear by all the posts in this thread, some from people who are even align with him politically on many issues, the reason many people find him absolutely intolerable is due to him having an extremely low threshold of dissent before he considers them sub-human scum. Now, everyone has some kind of threshold; I wouldn't expect people to tolerate those who think we should hang people for their skin color, or executing people for the gods they worship, and pretty much everyone has some kind of pet issue that will act as a deal breaker, but, good lord, Bob just takes it to a whole other level. He seems completely unable empathize with anyone who even slightly disagrees. He's basically the poster child for that age old paradox of "tolerance for all, except all those other scumbags who think differently".
There's a reason why the opinion here is all but unanimous.

Honestly, I've seen a lot worse (and frequently) from posters here. That's why, despite my own ambivalence towards the guy, I also think there's a great deal of empty posturing about him.

 

[Silvanus]

Let me chime in as someone who just doesn't care either way, at all. The guy is a raging prick, and what he has to offer is not worth the cost he demands in his prickishness. He has "I invented a new kind of integrated circuit" ego, but "I make video game reviews online, and I'm not the best at my job" production.

That you can point to worse on the internet (who can't? when "Animal crush" is a fucking thing, and people are killing baby dolphins for a selfie?) just reeks of apologism, and I have to ask why.

I'm not apologising for anybody. I'm pointing out the irony involved when every thread with any connection to the man spirals into a mountain of expletive-laden insults, when the main point of criticism is that he cannot contain his personal animosities.

 

[Roboshi]

Honestly, I've seen a lot worse (and frequently) from posters here. That's why, despite my own ambivalence towards the guy, I also think there's a great deal of empty posturing about him.

The main difference there is, Bob is supposed to be a guy who wants to make his business making content on the internet. You act like an insufferable ass on a forum you get a block or a ban or something, but you try doing it at your job.

It's about being a professional and conducting yourself in a professional manner versus just being someone making dickish comments on the internet.

It's also hard for him to try and hold the moral high ground while calling people subhuman for having a different political view. I mean I don't agree with american gun laws but I at least try and talk to gun owners with some civility.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

I knew Portnow did it as well but I seem to remember that Moviebob jumped on the opportunity as well. Guess I was misremembering. Side note, what the hell happened to Portnow? I have been liserning to old Co optional podcasts at work (do data entry and it is a great way to hold back the bordem) and the podcast where he was a guest they seemed to get along great. How do you go from that to attacking a guy while he is literly in the middle of a chemo session?

He took the Jason Schrier approach and through TB in the pro-GG camp for even saying GG had some good points. Even though TB remained neutral on the matter due to a personal friend of his getting legit harassed by a pro-GG prominent figure. It backfired because it was classless. It was well known that TB was going through chemo so James probably couldn't reach him privately to discuss the matter. He chose to do it publicly and fucked up because he was factually wrong.

He's still working on Extra Credits though they did lose a chunk of fans a while back when they made a video about what makes a game, "a game" and followed up with a video telling their audience they're wrong for disagreeing with them. The video came out when indie walking simulators with no fail states started winning GOTY awards, so it was basically in defense one genre of game.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

Let me chime in as someone who just doesn't care either way, at all. The guy is a raging prick, and what he has to offer is not worth the cost he demands in his prickishness. He has "I invented a new kind of integrated circuit" ego, but "I make video game reviews online, and I'm not the best at my job" production.

That you can point to worse on the internet (who can't? when "Animal crush" is a fucking thing, and people are killing baby dolphins for a selfie?) just reeks of apologism, and I have to ask why.

I'm not apologising for anybody. I'm pointing out the irony involved when every thread with any connection to the man spirals into a mountain of expletive-laden insults, when the main point of criticism is that he cannot contain his personal animosities.

Maybe that's some people's main point, but not mine, nor does it really seem to the main point of any majority here. My main reason for disliking him is not the he can't keep his politics to himself, but that he has a really obnoxious "you're either with me, or you're a ****" type of approach to it. The way that he frequently can't keep his intolerance to himself doesn't help, but it's not my issue with him.

 

[Silvanus]

The main difference there is, Bob is supposed to be a guy who wants to make his business making content on the internet. You act like an insufferable ass on a forum you get a block or a ban or something, but you try doing it at your job.

It's about being a professional and conducting yourself in a professional manner versus just being someone making dickish comments on the internet.

There are different expectations, I suppose. I just would have expected that if people considered it such terrible behaviour, they wouldn't engage in it.

Maybe that's some people's main point, but not mine, nor does it really seem to the main point of any majority here. My main reason for disliking him is not the he can't keep his politics to himself, but that he has a really obnoxious "you're either with me, or you're a ****" type of approach to it. The way that he frequently can't keep his intolerance to himself doesn't help, but it's not my issue with him.

Fair enough. Suffice it to say, it's a very common line of criticism. It's come up several times in this thread already.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

snip

Well nobody here that I've seen have demonized an entire group of people, called them the scum of the Earth, and hope for their death based on what Bob's said, so I'd say there is a noticeable gulf between Bob and his critics. He really is just that bad and no amount of apologism is going to change that.

 

[Silvanus]

Well nobody here that I've seen have demonized an entire group of people, called them the scum of the Earth, and hope for their death based on what Bob's said, so I'd say there is a noticeable gulf between Bob and his critics.

Demonising groups of people is remarkably common, particularly down in R&P. That's kind of beside the point, though, which was how the conversation inevitably swings in that direction (and hard), regardless of the relevance to the topic.

He really is just that bad and no amount of apologism is going to change that.

Once again: I am not apologising for him. I can offer two cents on the conduct of other forum-goers without being accused of supporting someone I've not said anything supportive of. Let's not start accusing eachother because we're not being loud enough in our condemnations.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Well nobody here that I've seen have demonized an entire group of people, called them the scum of the Earth, and hope for their death based on what Bob's said, so I'd say there is a noticeable gulf between Bob and his critics.

Demonising groups of people is remarkably common, particularly down in R&P. That's kind of beside the point, though, which was how the conversation inevitably swings in that direction (and hard), regardless of the relevance to the topic.

Once again, I have not seen demonizing an entire group of people, calling them the scum of the Earth, and hoping for their death based on what Bob's said. Nobody here is as bad as Bob. You're not going to be able to equate people criticizing Bob to Bob himself. Until someone here says "All SJWs should be killed because they're all like Bob." By all means, rip into that guy.

He really is just that bad and no amount of apologism is going to change that.

Once again: I am not apologising for him. I can offer two cents on the conduct of other forum-goers without being accused of supporting someone I've not said anything supportive of. Let's not start accusing eachother because we're not being loud enough in our condemnations.

You came into this thread saying it's hypocritical to criticize Bob by trying to draw parallels between them and Bob where any parallels are very weak. It's apologism. Even the people who would agree with him think he's a prick. He is noticeably worse than anybody here.

 

[Roboshi]

There are different expectations, I suppose. I just would have expected that if people considered it such terrible behaviour, they wouldn't engage in it.

I think one problem there is that you're judging every individual in this forum by the actions of the very worst members. I've been reading this topic pretty closely and I haven't seen one instance of the sort of behaviour Bob has been guilty of. In fact I'd say the worst people have said about him was that his videos were not that good and if you can't critique a video on a forum that contains video content where can you do that?

We are judging one person because of that ONE persons actions but you are calling it hypocritical because we are sharing a forum with people who are just as bad, as though every member of this forum is keeping a tally of the actions of every other member. If you can find evidence of any one of us here doing the kind of shit Bob did then by all means call them out on it. But don't assume the entire forum acts as some sort of hive mind just because we happened to visit the same URL.

 

[Strazdas]

He can be somewhat insufferable sometimes, but I generally find him entertaining/informative. He's no RedLetterMedia in regards to movie review content, but he's still worth a watch imo.

i found him entertaining too when he wouldnt spend 90% of the review drooling over some hot actress, but in comparison, the GoodBadFlicks we got now are a thousand times more informative.

 

[kitsunefather]

Well, it's a thread related to MovieBob, sure. But then, MovieBob's commentary usually has some connection with the topic at hand, too; it's just that people don't want him griping about personal dislikes.

For what it's worth, I had no problem with his personal gripes being part of his show. Often times, he would include it in an entertaining way, or I found personal amusement in guessing with friends when the complaint about Amazing Spider-Man or Transformers was going to happen.

I found a dislike for him with his "no bad tactics, only bad targets" thought process, and his conceit that everything boils down to a battle between good and evil, and if you "stand with evil" then you deserve whatever harm comes your way. I'm a "gray area" kind of person, and I find his willful refusal for discussion, coupled with his hate-filled and often ill-informed diatribes, to be reprehensible.

All that said, I do hope he finds some kind of peace and success in his ventures; I just hope it includes some humility and humanity.

 

[spartandude]

Maybe they got sick of hearing him complain about The Amazing Spiderman non stop and wanted him to do something else.

 

[MatParker116]

There under Rooster Teeth's control now and some of what Bob covers could lead to Gavin or Burnie deciding against renewing his deal.

 

[Smoketrail]

Just proof that you reap what you sow.

So no bad tactics just bad targets then?

 

[Silence]

Just proof that you reap what you sow.

So no bad tactics just bad targets then?

You know, exactly that is why I, personally, did not really attack MovieBob. He has problems, they don't go away by adding to them.
He pretty much is a bad target.

But common people don't realize that, and that is exactly why he gets so much hate, because he did spread so much.