How much LP footage did Anita Sarkeesian "steal", exactly?

NuclearKangaroo

New member
Feb 7, 2014
1,919
0
0
LifeCharacter said:
NuclearKangaroo said:
looking for proof is not part of the research process...

what?
Citing something is not part of the research process. It is part of generating academic work that results from your research. It is entirely possible to research something and not then go on to cite what you researched.
if she is making her own footage, and she is not citing someone else's proof

what is exactly sustaining her arguments?


LifeCharacter said:
she was paid 150k to be lazy...

oh ok, shes a scam artist then

theres absolutely no way she comes out clean, almost every single scenario paints her as a scam artist one way or the other
If being slightly lazy in gathering footage for her videos makes her a scam artist to you, good for you. I mean, it has absolutely nothing to do with her arguments or research but, what the hell, why not call her a scam artist just because you can?
-150k dollars
-6 months between videos
-not playing the games herself
-using someone else's footage and not givign them credit for it

slightly lazy... SLIGHTLY

you dont know the meaning of that word

her arguments, oh, those are an entirely different matter that one can easily refute within 3 minutes and with time to spare

LifeCharacter said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcPIu3sDkEw

"im not a fan of video games..."

"i would like to play video games, but i wouldnt want to go around shooting people and ripping out their heads its just gross..."

i cant imagine what goes through your mind, i cant imagine how can you to listen to that statement and not come to the conclusion that anita is not a fan of video games, that she is not a gamer

your argument is indefensible
You can't imagine interpreting "I'm not a fan of video games" in a way that's not "I am not a gamer! I never play games! I'm a lying scam artist!"? She couldn't possibly mean that she's not a fan of the current state of video games, or gamer culture, or whatever. Nope, she means exactly what you want her to mean because fuck her, she criticized your precious hobby!
a gamer is a fan of video games, she is not a fan of video games

if you are going by the broad definition of gamer, that is, that ANYBODY playing ANY game is a gamer, then thats problematic, a 80 year old granma that plays nothing but solitaire on her PC could be considered a gamer, but then again, how useful would be her input in a gaming discussion?

as for "I never play games!"

well, she said it herself

"i WOULD like to play video game"

as in, she DOESNT currently play video games, and her piss poor reasoning behind that

"i wouldnt want to go around shooting people and ripping out their heads its just gross..."

only futher proves how little she knows about video games, many of the video games she has critized in her, beyond laughable series of videos, such as mario, rogue legacy, ghouls and goblins, etc, feature almost no graphic violence, something that anybody with even the most BASIC knowledge of gaming should know

for instance, of my 200+ game collection, accross steam, gog and origin, roughly 1 third of them dont show any sort of blood, and this is comming from an adult gamer with obviously an inclination and the opportunity to buy M rated games

according to the ESRB

http://www.esrb.org/ratings/search.jsp

there are around 646375 with the E rating, and that isnt counting T and E+10

so this line here

"i would like to play video games, but i wouldnt want to go around shooting people and ripping out their heads its just gross..."

proves she is full of crap

LifeCharacter said:
i didnt know integrity and standards meant i couldnt draw my own conclusions based on the evidence present at the moment, thats a new one
I didn't know evidence that was circumstantial at best was enough to justify slandering someone. You've yet to provide any actual evidence that she doesn't play the games she talks about, so should I just conclude that you have none and go about doing something productive or would you like to show that integrity you supposedly like so much and provide something beyond conspiracies and assumptions?
circumstantial evidence is not enough to accuse someone of something, boy, courts must be full of shit then

also, her own words, circumstantial evidence

yeah you dont know the meaning of that either
 

Irick

New member
Apr 18, 2012
225
0
0
Nukekitten said:
And that's about all I'm going to say on that particular line. I don't agree with many of the things Anita says, but I'm not going to advocate pillorying her simply on the basis I feel she's bad at her job.
What she has done is clearly fair use, literally a textbook case, but regardless of that it's a moot point until she's sued for it. Fair use is a defense, as people have pointed out.

What she has done is also not very academic, even though many people consider it to be. So, I will criticize her for not attributing her sources.
 

BarbaricGoose

New member
May 25, 2010
796
0
0
The_Kodu said:
Okay, man... agree to disagree. I was never arguing about the laws of copyright--I don't know how you got off on that tangent, or why you keep thinking that was my argument. I've tried and tried to explain my position, but clearly it ain't getting through. Maybe I'm the problem here, because I am struggling to understand a lot of your responses, and maybe I'm misunderstanding them.

In any case, I'm gonna bow out.
 

NuclearKangaroo

New member
Feb 7, 2014
1,919
0
0
LifeCharacter said:
I honestly have no idea what you're rambling about here anymore. Are we still talking about how you seem to think that, if there are no citations there was no research?
im talking about how, if she isnt going to record her own gameplay, she should atleast cite her sources. you know, a proper fucking investigation, have you ever written a report?

i mean this is painfully simple stuff for ANY sort of research


LifeCharacter said:
-150k dollars
-6 months between videos
-not playing the games herself
-using someone else's footage and not givign them credit for it

slightly lazy... SLIGHTLY

you dont know the meaning of that word

her arguments, oh, those are an entirely different matter that one can easily refute within 3 minutes and with time to spare
Not recording herself playing the games. If you're not going to be honest you can just stop right now and go away. I'm not playing this stupid game with you anymore. You have no evidence she didn't play the games other than your baseless, flimsy excuse for conjecture.
go ahead and leave then

play or record, my point was that, she had 150k and six months to work, she didnt work, that is not "slightly" lazy

LifeCharacter said:
Which means she was too lazy to play an entire game again for the sake of recording five seconds of footage, before doing the same thing multiple times over. I'm sorry she didn't put enough effort into the extra video examples that compliment her arguments for you, but get over it.
what is she getting paid for then? i mean if she is going to spend 150k, waste 6 months and half-ass the research, why is her opinion important? is that the attitude of someone who takes her research seriously? can you imagine if more people acted like this?

"yeah they paid me millions of dollars and gave me years to work on cancer research but im too lazy for that, im just going to copy and paste someone else's paper and give him no credit for it"

LifeCharacter said:
And, if you can refute her arguments in three minutes with time to spare, do it and stop whining about how she's a scam artist because she didn't cite some poor Let's Player. The only question now is whether or not you'll just parrot Thunderf00t's pathetic cherry picking and tangential moaning or come up with your own brand of irrelevant criticism to use against her.
oh you want to derail the discussion already? how nice

if you want her argument refuted youtube and google is that way, better people than me have dissected her poorly constructed arguments, if you wont listen to them, you wont listen to me

right now we are talking about her "research" if you can even call it that, we can discuss her laughable arguments later


LifeCharacter said:
Listen, if you want to interpret everything she says in the exact way that damns her in the eyes of her creepily obsessed critics, you go right ahead. I honestly don't care because, at this point, I don't really have very high standards for the people that go through the usual checklist for Sarkeesian threads.
so you expect me to ignore her words and read her mind to know what she meant? bravo

im gonna take a wild guess, make an outrageous assumption, and say that, when she said she "im not a fan of video games" she meant that she is not a fan of video games, as CRAZY as that might sound

oh and nice job completely ignoring my proof that not all games are violent and therefore her excuse for not playing is pathetic, and a clear sign that she doesnt know anything about video games


LifeCharacter said:
Circumstantial evidence is usually a bit more convincing than "She didn't cite LPers, she obviously didn't play the games!" when it's actually taken as evidence. What you have right now is bullshit stacked into a pile and covered in paint to try and convince yourself even the slightest bit convincing.
oh let me see

-not a fan of video games
-had 150k and 6 months to record footage, she didnt
-stole footage from LPs and didnt credit them with the clear intention of making everyone believe she played those video games

yes, im going to draw the conclusion she did not play those video games, because that what you do with circunstantial evidence

"Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact?like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime"

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

like i said, you DO NOT KNOW THE MEANING OF THOSE WORDS

LifeCharacter said:
Oh, and did she say "I'm not a fan of video games" and everything else recently? I was under the impression that that little video clip was from several years ago. Are you really trying to use her statements from years ago to prove her actions in the present? Even if we go by your interpretation of what that video meant, why the hell would you think it's okay to act like it was recorded yesterday?
that video is from 2010, she started her kickstarter in 2012

"several"

you expect me to believe that someone who is "not a fan of video games", thinks that they are "gross", someone who admited NOT playing video games, had a change of heart within 2 years, became a fan of video games, but still wont play video games for her research?

fuckin' wow

not to mention she outright lied several times to the press saying she has been gaming her entire life and that she is a fan of video games... you know, except for that one time she wasnt a fan of video games and never played them
 

Nukekitten

New member
Sep 21, 2014
76
0
0
Irick said:
What she has done is clearly fair use, literally a textbook case, but regardless of that it's a moot point until she's sued for it. Fair use is a defense, as people have pointed out.

What she has done is also not very academic, even though many people consider it to be. So, I will criticize her for not attributing her sources.
I don't disagree with you. It's just that terms like theft were being thrown around. She's not a good scholar, and it is a bit of a mean thing not to atribute your sources.

I give her some excuses on that point because video isn't a great system by which to attribute sources in a scholarly sense of having them meaningfully checkable for a meaningful claim - If she did what she should have done; searched at random through N videos and taken the percentage of them where the alleged abuse happened; that would be an awful long citation list. But at the end of the day some of the stuff she says is really reaching, it's not like I think particularly well of her, and since she's not being particularly meaningful in her claims her citation needs don't really run into those difficulties.

All that said, I was responding to someone else's claims about the nature of copyright law rather than saying that she wasn't doing anything iffy because 'hey, fair use!' There's legal and then there's decent, and however much she meets the first criteria I don't think much of her on the latter.
 

Irick

New member
Apr 18, 2012
225
0
0
MarsAtlas said:
Irick said:
What she has done is also not very academic, even though many people consider it to be. So, I will criticize her for not attributing her sources.
I would argue that the sources are the games, not the Let's Player's gameplay. She uses the gameplay footage without critiquing the actions of the player, but rather what can, or does, happen in the game. The game's are the reference, not the footage. Similarly, when doing a research paper, say, psychology, you don't write about each and every one of the individual test subjects when referencing another paper, you just cite the conclusion.
While that is an opinion you can hold, her use of the Let's Player's gameplay is still inherent to the medium. She is quoting their actions, even if it is just to provide visual example, she still needs to attribute those sources. This is general professionalism, but when it comes to an academic piece, it is also a method to establish verifiability.

When you write a paper in psychology, you cite every study you use, even if it is just for part of it. Not doing so is an issue. It doesn't matter if it is a single supporting sentence or a single idea, you cite it. Not citing it is plagiarism. Unfortunately your proposed metaphor doesn't work. These are not incidental subjects of a study down the line, there are people she is directly quoting in her presentation.

Nukekitten said:
I give her some excuses on that point because video isn't a great system by which to attribute sources in a scholarly sense of having them meaningfully checkable for a meaningful claim - If she did what she should have done; searched at random through N videos and taken the percentage of them where the alleged abuse happened; that would be an awful long citation list. But at the end of the day some of the stuff she says is really reaching, it's not like I think particularly well of her, and since she's not being particularly meaningful in her claims her citation needs don't really run into those difficulties.
I don't.
Methodology should always be presented when making claims of probability or substance, if this is the case. In the case of an opinion piece, if you are going to use someone else's words/actions/picture/doodle, you cite it. Youtube makes this fairly easy with its annotation system, or she could put her sources in the description. It doesn't matter. She should cite what she uses, it's the professional thing to do and it is critical for academic analysis.
 

PainInTheAssInternet

The Ship Magnificent
Dec 30, 2011
826
0
0
She inexplicably stole everyone's common sense and dignity as even people I tend to respect on online forums get caught up on her. I honestly don't understand how she became such a contentious individual as she was nothing more than an unknown individual with no influence making barebones observations. All she did for me was confirm my belief that the internet really loves to blow things, especially hate trains, way out of proportion and the only unpredictable element is who it will happen to.
 

Nukekitten

New member
Sep 21, 2014
76
0
0
Irick said:
I don't.
Methodology should always be presented when making claims of probability or substance, if this is the case. In the case of an opinion piece, if you are going to use someone else's words/actions/picture/doodle, you cite it. Youtube makes this fairly easy with its annotation system, or she could put her sources in the description. It doesn't matter. She should cite what she uses, it's the professional thing to do and it is critical for academic analysis.
It is unprofessional because she's not a professional. She's some random woman who's decided to spend a little time spreading her opinion, with a basis in a certain form of feminism, around and has found she can make a little money off it. The search for truth, that respect that certain methods produce more accurate results, is blatantly not a craft to her. It's not a craft for her in the same sense that it's not a craft for the partisan news channels.

I touched on this briefly when I said she's not making particularly meaningful claims.

I'd prefer it if unprofessional people continue to behave unprofessionally. It makes them easier to pick out and ignore.

- Look at the work, go 'Does it have citations?'
- No? Oh, it's just noise/argument then.
- Stick the don't take too seriously flag on it.

If folks with the same general behaviour as her start citing their work, I don't feel like they'll suddenly develop decent methodology. It feels more like they'll just cite a large mass of noise that someone might spend time checking on - or preferentially cite only the things that support their position. Merely manifesting the surface artefacts of a craft does not necessarily make you any better at it.
 

Irick

New member
Apr 18, 2012
225
0
0
Nukekitten said:
It is unprofessional because she's not a professional. She's some random woman who's decided to spend a little time spreading her opinion, with a basis in a certain form of feminism, around and has found she can make a little money off it.
And in that, I will expect professionalism.
Nukekitten said:
I touched on this briefly when I said she's not making particularly meaningful claims.


I'd prefer it if unprofessional people continue to behave unprofessionally. It makes them easier to pick out and ignore.

- Look at the work, go 'Does it have citations?'
It does have some citations.
She usually links back to the project page on her youtube videos, which has full transcripts and some of the cited works. She just doesn't consider citing the lets players apparently, and that level of disrespect is unprofessional.
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,651
0
0
dunam said:
And if you're wondering about the criticism of her being a game or not, it's in this video, in her own words:

Holy crap! This is textbook sociopathic behavior. I'm not even joking. This is literally what a sociopath would do. Look it up. She's glib, she's lying [about her gaming habits, among other things], she's not crediting people she takes footage from like it's not a big deal, she's completely unapologetic and has a rationalization for everything wrong that she does etc. It was obvious from the get-go that her primary motive was money. And I have to question the intellect of anyone who can't see that. Female sociopaths are quite rare so it's harder to tell, but this is some pretty convincing stuff. She's even using a fuckin' teleseminar tactic!

I think I finally understand why I can't stand her. I know a couple of sociopaths in real life. I could always tell what they were after a while. They can't hide it for long. And once they know that you know, they become your enemies. They don't necessarily know that they're sociopaths, but they know they're doing something wrong and that you know it. It's only a matter of time before she makes a mistake she won't be able to recover from. If internet wasn't so full of idiots, that would have happened a long time ago when her lies and logical inconsistencies were first exposed. But nope, some people are just too naive and deprived of critical thinking skills, they fall even for the dumbest, most obvious crap.
 

omega 616

New member
May 1, 2009
5,883
1
0
Unless she is wholesale ripping the entire video and showing it, how is she "stealing" (which, as it comes up all the time in piracy debates, isn't stealing, it's copying)?

She is using footage from other youtubers? So she is using short segments of gameplay, that are already short segments of gameplay? So stealing from thieves? ... No honor among thieves then?
 

omega 616

New member
May 1, 2009
5,883
1
0
dunam said:
Youtube and derivative work is kind of broad, I have seen "silent lets plays" (where somebody just plays the game and uploads it), "voiced lets plays" and then things like COD.

The difference in the last two is, one is playing a linear game and the other is posting their skill at COD or a story they made up minecraft etc.

I get your point but it's a bit like buying a famous painting and then saying it's been transformed 'cos you put it in a different frame. Sure, you put work into the original piece, so you have added "value" but it's not an enormous effort on your part.... you bought some gear, maybe chatted over it and then uploaded it.

To bring it back to my previous post, Anita took picture of your newly framed famous piece of art and used it in a video on how adding a new frame can change the look of a picture.

The person who uploaded the lets play wanted to entertain through them playing somebody else's work, Anita used a video of somebody playing a game to illustrate her own point. "stealing" in this case would be copying a video from (for example) pewdiepie (I hate how that was the first big gaming youtube name that popped to mind!) and uploading it as her work.... which would be hard without voice changing tech.

Stop hating Anita 'cos you disagree with her. This is just making stuff up and then seeing how many people jump on the band wagon named "S.S shit Anita has done wrong!".

I haven't watched all her stuff but from the video I did see and what I remember from it, seemed more like "a lot of women are being given shitty personalities and designs. Can we change this!?" then nerds the world over said "fuck this *****, trying to change our hobby! Lets get her!".

Quite frankly, I agree! Lara Croft, star of the Tomb Raider games ... known for being a 3rd person, action shooter should NOT have cocktail dresses! She should also be more suitably clothed than wearing booty shorts to an ice cave! (first tomb raider!) More modern games, Miranda getting constant ass shots, meeting Jack who was dressed in belts and Samara who had the deepest V cut in the universe! The old witch in Dragon age is sexied up in Dragon age 2 ... so during dragon age Flemeth was a decently depicted old witch, while at the same time ('cos dragon age 1 and the start of 2 happen at pretty similar times) being quite a youthful and attractive witch!

 

Nukekitten

New member
Sep 21, 2014
76
0
0
Irick said:
And in that, I will expect professionalism.
Why would someone who's not a professional want, or be reasonably expected, to behave like a professional?

Irick said:
It does have some citations.
She usually links back to the project page on her youtube videos, which has full transcripts and some of the cited works. She just doesn't consider citing the lets players apparently, and that level of disrespect is unprofessional.
Hmm, not really what I'd call a citation system but *she shrugs* mileage may vary I suppose.
 

Irick

New member
Apr 18, 2012
225
0
0
Nukekitten said:
Why would someone who's not a professional want, or be reasonably expected, to behave like a professional?
When they start being paid for their work, it becomes a profession. These videos are not a hobby project. They are the product of a company she started with this purpose.

The argument that she is not a professional is disingenuine.

Beyond that, I'm holding her to academic standards. Will you dispute her academic credentials as well?

Nukekitten said:
Hmm, not really what I'd call a citation system but *she shrugs* mileage may vary I suppose.
*quirks a brow*
Well, then... What would you consider a citation system?