Jim Sterling in court.

[Silvanus]

It's not that he's anti-consumer. It's that he' pro-consumer, but only when it's not involving his buddies in the indi-industry. Sad to say, it does come back to GamerGate, but it wan't his condemnation of it that got me to start calling him two faced.

[snipped most for space, but I assure you I did read it]

Right. Well, that's not a solid basis at all, really. It rests on the specious presumption that anyone defending consumer rights must be in favour of Gamergate; that only one stance is in line with being in the consumer's corner.

That's complete bollocks. Consumers themselves do not agree on it, and one side does not get to claim that mantle in good faith.

TLDR:

He is pro consumer but only when it suits him, is there a game he can mock and get tons of ad rev from? "Oh this game is bad steam shouldn't have this!" is a AAA company bringing out a broken game? "Oh this game should've been fixed!" he takes the lowest hanging fruit, the blindly obvious stance anyone would make but when it comes to making a hard choice, having to demand better from your friends who work in the industry?

"Oh it's those dudebro entitled gamers making crap up to harass those strong independent womyn devs again."

Are we really judging him for what he didn't cover, coupled with an assumption as to motive? That's paper-thin.

 

[Silvanus]

Well the fact that he'd already sided against the Wizards with the original start to the Zoe Quinn debacle despite the evidence that was readily available, AND he'd made a voice acting appearence in one of her games should be rather telling. I wouldn't call it paper thin evidence as much as it is evidence that's as fat as he is. (I'm fat, I'm allowed fat person jokes.)

Honestly, if he claimed neutrality and just stayed out of the conversation due to conflicts of interest that would've been one thing. (But that would require him to actually have journalistic ethics so that ain't gonna happen.) Instead he decided he was firmly anti-gamergate and back up his arguments with the gamers are dead articles.

Did he ever hide his involvement in that project? As far as I know, he's always disclosed his projects. Expressing an opinion, while hiding nothing, is not unethical.

Also, no matter how much this little fact may make you squirm, GamerGate very much IS a consumer revolt, and seeing a supposed consumer advocate stand against it using the same material said revolt started with very much puts Jimmy in the "fair weather advocate" corner.

It's undeniable, by any rational person, that consumers themselves are not in agreement about Gamergate. That's inescapable. And with that in mind, it cannot be reasonable to conclude that if somebody is in the consumer's corner, they must support one side or the other.

But considering just WHO I'm talking to, I shouldn't be surprised that anything I can and could bring up would basically be waved off without so much as a second glance. So how's the sand been treating ya if I may ask?

Pointless personal insults.

 

[JimB]

Also, no matter how much this little fact may make you squirm, GamerGate very much is a consumer revolt, and seeing a supposed consumer advocate stand against it using the same material said revolt started with very much puts Jimmy in the "fair weather advocate" corner.

Some aspects of GamerGate are about consumers. Others are about hate and organized harassment of minorities. No one, not even Jim Sterling, is required to ignore the hateful aspects of GamerGate to suit your understanding of it, because people are allowed to have their own priorities and draw their own conclusions.

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

Others are about hate and organized harassment of minorities.

CITATION!

FREAKING!

NEEDED!

EVERY time. It's basically the SAME frigging thing every time.

"GG is a hate group!" "What's the evidence?" "The journos who GG has grievances with said so!"

9.9/10 times it's this EXACT bit of circular reasoning.

 

[JimB]

Others are about hate and organized harassment of minorities.

CITATION!

FREAKING!

NEEDED!

EVERY time.

You will forgive me if I do not choose to provide it. I do not tell you GamerGate is about organized harassment to convince you, because I do not believe you have any interest in being convinced, since the "true" nature of GamerGate is so self-evident to you that you seem to feel you can speak with authority as to the behavior of everyone united under GamerGate without providing the same level of citation you demand of me. I tell you GamerGate is about organized harassment because I wish to illustrate that other perspectives than your own exist.

 

[Monsterfurby]

Others are about hate and organized harassment of minorities.

CITATION!

FREAKING!

NEEDED!

EVERY time. It's basically the SAME frigging thing every time.

"GG is a hate group!" "What's the evidence?" "The journos who GG has grievances with said so!"

9.9/10 times it's this EXACT bit of circular reasoning.

Search /r/Kotakuinaction for "Feminism".

 

[Fsyco]

What do I think is going though DH's head? I think it's a mix of the two extremes. They genuinely have justified everything that they've done in their head and they see silencing Sterling as a good thing for them and for the community.

I didn't have an answer for this when it first came up, but now that we've had a page of useless gamergate bickering I feel like some of their motivations may have come to light.

Given that they've filed false claims against his videos we know already that they aren't that honest. Personally, I think they're circling their wagons. With their wagons being..well...the "ethical journalism" crowd, otherwise vaguely known as Gamergate. Just take a look at Metalix's post for a sample of how much that group hates Sterling. They hate him, they're against him, and they want him gone for being...idk..two faced or something?

So, when DigitalHomicide releases their public statement about their lawsuit, what do they highlight? What drum do they beat? The 'ethical' ramifications of 'unethical' critics who are harming the community by lying and being 'unethical' of course! It's about all they can do at this point. That crowd is pretty much their last bet.

That's a reasonably clever strategy, but I haven't seen that attitude crop up anywhere else except this thread, so I think it's not quite gone the way they want it to. Largely because you have to be really fargone to argue "I want a serious miscarriage of justice to occur to spite this person that I don't like", especially since the evidence of DH being malicious and delusional is already well-established.

They might have been banking on getting donations through GoFundMe from Anti-Jim people, but that seems really risky considering the time and money they have to sink into pursuing this case. I don't think they were ever going to make a return on that particular investment, if that was their plan.

 

[Stillgard]

You know, if this wasn't completely sad. It'd actually be really, REALLY funny. While it is really REALLY funny. The fact that we're even entertaining this notion is a big "F-Bomb" To freedom of speech. What needs to happen here is have Steam insert some sort of council that's designed to review cases like this. If only to stop things from ever reaching this far or having crap appear on the front page of steam. That is clearly abusing fair usage rights.

 

[Fsyco]

You know, if this wasn't completely sad. It'd actually be really, REALLY funny. While it is really REALLY funny. The fact that we're even entertaining this notion is a big "F-Bomb" To freedom of speech. What needs to happen here is have Steam insert some sort of council that's designed to review cases like this. If only to stop things from ever reaching this far or having crap appear on the front page of steam. That is clearly abusing fair usage rights.

It's actually got nothing much to do with fair use. It's a bit more closely related to freedom of the press, since they're suing for libel over an article that Jim wrote. They don't claim anything copyright-related in their complaint; they're claiming that Jim's article pointing out their shady behavior is false and has hurt their business.

Steam wouldn't have jurisdiction over the court case, but if they had more dedicated QA they could have prevented DigiHom from trading under the name "ECC Games" (or just not had them put their shit on Steam in the first place).

 

[rcs619]

You will forgive me if I do not choose to provide it. I do not tell you GamerGate is about organized harassment to convince you, because I do not believe you have any interest in being convinced, since the "true" nature of GamerGate is so self-evident to you that you seem to feel you can speak with authority as to the behavior of everyone united under GamerGate without providing the same level of citation you demand of me. I tell you GamerGate is about organized harassment because I wish to illustrate that other perspectives than your own exist.

Search /r/Kotakuinaction for "Feminism".

The whole thing literally started as an organized harassment campaign against some almost unknown indie dev based on the extremely biased and obviously bitter manifesto of her ex-boyfriend and the fact that 4chan already had a hate-boner for her from some other drama before. Even when the original claims about a potential conflict of interest were disproved, they still kept up the harassment campaign. Hell, at one point Gamersgaters circulated naked pics of Zoe Quinn, and sent them to her family and friends. Considering that these are the same people so vehemently siding with Hulk Hogan about his right to privacy, I find this slightly ironic.

They didn't slap the "Ethics and Game Jurnolizm" bit on until later so that they could try to present at least some sort feigned legitimacy. Unfortunately, some people actually seem to have bought that line.

Jim Sterling was actually one of the few people in games media who didn't seem to pick a side, and I felt like he stayed pretty reasonable throughout the whole mess. He mocked the idiots and trolls, while bringing up actual ethical concerns in the videogame industry (like all the shady things publishers and advertisers do to secure reviews, and all the hoops they force games media to jump through, with the constant threat of blacklisting or loss of access if they don't do it).

 

[JimB]

The whole thing literally started as an organized harassment campaign against some almost unknown indie dev based on the extremely biased and obviously bitter manifesto of her ex-boyfriend and the fact that 4chan already had a hate-boner for her from some other drama before. Even when the original claims about a potential conflict of interest were disproved, they still kept up the harassment campaign. Hell, at one point Gamergaters circulated naked pics of Zoe Quinn, and sent them to her family and friends.

Unfortunately, since GamerGate has chosen, I suspect deliberately, to remain as amorphous and disorganized as possible by refusing to adopt a formal, unifying credo or take any kind of central leadership, they have nearly infinite deniability for whatever you want to accuse them of, because they can respond to nearly anything with, "That wasn't GamerGate!" What GamerGate is gets to be left up to each individual defining it, and that way the movement can't be taken to task for what anyone does because the organization is too decentralized to accept any blame except on an individual level. It's a little funny to me because I often wonder if this stance wasn't adopted in knowing mimicry of feminism, which is itself a wide range of different beliefs and methodologies with no central authority figures that makes it shallow and fallacious to treat feminism as a monolith.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

Guys, please don't turn this into yet another Gamergate thread. There's an entire subforum for that.

 

[Fsyco]

Guys, please don't turn this into yet another Gamergate thread. There's an entire subforum for that.

Too late. Thread derailed. Thousands dead, millions of dollars of property damage done. Officials are investigating how this tragedy could have occurred, and Congress is considering drafting new forum safety legislation to prevent accidents like this in the future. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families of those who hoped to have a non-GG related discussion.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

Too late. Thread derailed. Thousands dead, millions of dollars of property damage done. Officials are investigating how this tragedy could have occurred, and Congress is considering drafting new forum safety legislation to prevent accidents like this in the future. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families of those who hoped to have a non-GG related discussion.

Funny. But seriously. It's really unnecessary. It's already starting to bring in the typical hostility.

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

Others are about hate and organized harassment of minorities.

CITATION!

FREAKING!

NEEDED!

EVERY time. It's basically the SAME frigging thing every time.

"GG is a hate group!" "What's the evidence?" "The journos who GG has grievances with said so!"

9.9/10 times it's this EXACT bit of circular reasoning.

Search /r/Kotakuinaction for "Feminism".

First 4 posts.

So, I've seen a lot of hate from feminism to the MRM. I'm here to answer your questions on our movement and goals.
90 points 1,115 comments submitted 3 years ago by JethroSC to /r/Feminism

Gotten quite a lot of hate both in real life and on the internet when people have understood I'm an MRA. Most of it though, and this is easy to fix, is because of lack of understanding and lack of knowing what we do. I'm an MRA, and I frequent both /r/mensrights and /r/feminism, and I'm now here to answer YOUR questions to the MRM and an MRA in the most feminist country in the world - Sweden.

EDIT: People, respect the reddiquette. Don't downvote simply because you might not agree. No I'm not a troll, no I'm not a representative of the entire MRM, I merely have my ideas and my beliefs.

EDIT2: Also a good resource!: http://masculism.ca/blog/for-feminist-readers-an-introduction-to-the-mens-movement/
more
/r/feminism is full of male bigots
34 points 418 comments submitted 4 years ago by kwirky88 to /r/Feminism

I'm unsubscribing to /r/feminism because it's full of male bigots who are itching to shoot down female equality. I thought it would be a good place to discuss male/female equality but instead it's full of male circle jerks and back slapping.
Feminism: The "F bomb" of reddit
58 points 289 comments submitted 3 years ago by ChicagoRunner to /r/Feminism

Do you think the reason feminism gets a bad rap on reddit is partly because a lot of people don't understand what feminism is?

Some people (mostly the males) seem to be under the impression that feminism is about attacking men.

What are good ways to change that perception?

As I see it, feminism is about gender equality, so in a way, it is all encompasing. Why then is it so unpopular here on a generally "liberal" website?

edit: This is one of the best most thought provoking posts I've been a part of in r/feminism. The discussion is civil and all contributions have been well thought out and structured despite disagreements.

There are many great posts that I will respond to either tomorrow or the day after. I thank everyone for their responses. It has been a joy to actually discuss feminism in a thoughtful and intelligent manner.

Sorry to those who are more intelligent and articulate than I am, but I will do my best to reply to your comments on a similar level.
more
Reddit feminism is all about the white women, confirmed.
329 points 209 comments submitted 2 years ago by harleynight to /r/Feminism

When I first subscribed to this subreddit, the first thing I read was someone saying how current feminism does not include women of colour. And although I could understand where they were coming from, I was a little confused as to what 'feminism' they had

Such hatred. Such misandry.

You will forgive me if I do not choose to provide it. I do not tell you GamerGate is about organized harassment to convince you, because I do not believe you have any interest in being convinced, since the "true" nature of GamerGate is so self-evident to you that you seem to feel you can speak with authority as to the behavior of everyone united under GamerGate without providing the same level of citation you demand of me. I tell you GamerGate is about organized harassment because I wish to illustrate that other perspectives than your own exist.

Search /r/Kotakuinaction for "Feminism".

The whole thing literally started as an organized harassment campaign against some almost unknown indie dev based on the extremely biased and obviously bitter manifesto of her ex-boyfriend and the fact that 4chan already had a hate-boner for her from some other drama before. Even when the original claims about a potential conflict of interest were disproved, they still kept up the harassment campaign. Hell, at one point Gamersgaters circulated naked pics of Zoe Quinn, and sent them to her family and friends. Considering that these are the same people so vehemently siding with Hulk Hogan about his right to privacy, I find this slightly ironic.

They didn't slap the "Ethics and Game Jurnolizm" bit on until later so that they could try to present at least some sort feigned legitimacy. Unfortunately, some people actually seem to have bought that line.

Jim Sterling was actually one of the few people in games media who didn't seem to pick a side, and I felt like he stayed pretty reasonable throughout the whole mess. He mocked the idiots and trolls, while bringing up actual ethical concerns in the videogame industry (like all the shady things publishers and advertisers do to secure reviews, and all the hoops they force games media to jump through, with the constant threat of blacklisting or loss of access if they don't do it).

That is almost literally quoted word for word from pretty much every journo who doesn't like the idea of having to work with an ethics policy. I.E. most of Deepfreeze.

Guys, please don't turn this into yet another Gamergate thread. There's an entire subforum for that.

Too late. Thread derailed. Thousands dead, millions of dollars of property damage done. Officials are investigating how this tragedy could have occurred, and Congress is considering drafting new forum safety legislation to prevent accidents like this in the future. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families of those who hoped to have a non-GG related discussion.

Yeah, I was actually concerned this would happen. I'll bow out of the discussion in the hopes that will help re-rail the thread.

 

[Fsyco]

Blatant thread re-railing attempt:
What do we think DigiHom's endgame is here? I can't decide if they want Jim to settle or if they really think they can win this. They strike me as more delusional than stupid (which is an important distinction for predicting behavior). I'm not sure if their rage and wounded pride will prevent them from making sensible legal decisions (although they did file this complaint in the first place). I guess this boils down to "do they want money or an ego boost?".

 

[FalloutJack]

Blatant thread re-railing attempt:
What do we think DigiHom's endgame is here? I can't decide if they want Jim to settle or if they really think they can win this. They strike me as more delusional than stupid (which is an important distinction for predicting behavior). I'm not sure if their rage and wounded pride will prevent them from making sensible legal decisions (although they did file this complaint in the first place). I guess this boils down to "do they want money or an ego boost?".

I'm sure they want alot of things. Given their patterns, I would say that they keep reaching like this because they're too dumb or unskilled to do otherwise. These do not sound like competent people from whom a competent plan should arise.

 

[Fsyco]

Blatant thread re-railing attempt:
What do we think DigiHom's endgame is here? I can't decide if they want Jim to settle or if they really think they can win this. They strike me as more delusional than stupid (which is an important distinction for predicting behavior). I'm not sure if their rage and wounded pride will prevent them from making sensible legal decisions (although they did file this complaint in the first place). I guess this boils down to "do they want money or an ego boost?".

I'm sure they want alot of things. Given their patterns, I would say that they keep reaching like this because they're too dumb or unskilled to do otherwise. These do not sound like competent people from whom a competent plan should arise.

Eh, I'm a little hesitant to say that they're dumb. They're certainly delusional, but they do seem to come up with plans that would work if the world ran according to their logic instead of actual logic. IE, "If I keep making games, they'll get better!" and then proceeding to flood Steam with shit they cobble together (and given their hyper-inflated sense of entitlement, they might have every confidence that they'll win this suit and get all the damages they claim). But they do strike me as the type to make the occasional vindictive, emotional decision instead of the rational one.

Let's say this does go to trial, and that they win something. Nothing that they'd reasonably be awarded would outweigh the costs of the actually fighting this case. Even though they might technically win the case, they'll go bankrupt doing it. They get to tell everyone that they beat big mean Jim, claiming it as a victory for indie devs everywhere, but then reality ensues and they've got no money. Now where do they direct all that anger? Jim? Their families? The court system? It's not like they can sue Jim again for the legal fees (and they aren't entitled to be paid for this since they aren't lawyers).

 

[JimB]

What do we think DigiHom's endgame is here? I can't decide if they want Jim to settle or if they really think they can win this. They strike me as more delusional than stupid (which is an important distinction for predicting behavior). I'm not sure if their rage and wounded pride will prevent them from making sensible legal decisions (although they did file this complaint in the first place). I guess this boils down to "do they want money or an ego boost?"

They want Jim to fall silent. I can't even guess if they care about a victory in court or awarded damages or anything, as long as they get to control what he says about their games.