Verlander said:
Agreed, but I'll stop you right away. You're absolutely mad if you think that this is about journalistic integrity. Oh, I don't doubt that some people care about it, or maybe even a lot of people have an issue with it. However the response is well beyond that. It's known, downright advertised that videogame journalism is funded by corporations, biased, and otherwise "corrupt"... not unlike all media journalism. This isn't a case of the wool falling from the innocent eyes of the gaming community.
What this is about, and always has been about, is that an idiot woman who's been shouting her mouth off about "feminism" (the worst kind of -ism, clearly) was caught out being a fat hypocrite, and the internet seized on that. Largely, I don't have a problem with that, but what I do have a problem with is the extent of the backlash, the scale of which prompted the linked responses.
I'm hardly mad for believing it to be about journalistic integrity and visible corruption running rampant through a sect of gaming journalism. Just that much is made readily apparent by Kotaku's changing of their ethics code and "adjustments" or "updates" to articles, past and present, to actually represent verifiable conflicts of interest.
We've "known" that they're corrupt for a long time, with examples (dorito pope/kane and lynch firing) cropping up every couple years or so then swiftly forgotten, but this is the single most concrete bit of evidence we've gotten on the subject. It's pervasive and occurring directly in front of our faces with absolutely no effort to hide it. The brazenness of activities and outward showing of contempt from this lot is what's fueling the fires.
I won't lie. Quinn was definitely the impetus, but she was little more than an ignition source, the discussion has long since moved on from her to corruption, cronyism, censorship, and journalistic integrity/ethics. The discussion is about the obvious narratives (see the dozen or so articles with the same tone and idea hitting within a 48 hour period, after the idea to "kill gaming" was suggested by people involved behind the scenes) these people put forth and how, frankly, it's not acceptable.
The entire problem is that they, and folks like yourself, are doing nothing but trying to limit the conversation to that initial ignition source. That would be where the desperate cries of "they just hate women" are originating from. It's a narrative. They don't want to address the actual concern, not directly or publicly announced (see kotaku's rule changing) as that would put them in a less than advantageous position.
Verlander said:
I said "for years". These public figures who are dishing out dirt are largely people who write on a regular basis in support of the community. They are people who are personally invested in gaming, the industry and whatever. That's the only reason why they're even identifiable above, say, you or me. Their reaction to "Zoegate" has been rude, sure, because it's insane seeing people form such an online lynch mob. I never said that they were level headed in this situation, but rather that they are professionals, and clearly aren't out to murder people who own consoles.
As for your second paragraph, that just seems naive, without meaning to insult you. Of course you can. Opinions on this are split to that level, and this thing has become so huge it's swept up people who may not normally vocalise their beliefs. People are watching these videos just trying to keep up, and there have been many opportunists on both sides, with firm right wingers who already hate personalities like MovieBob making videos about him to take advantage of the situation, and man haters taking advantage in the same way to prove how sexist the games community is. Of course they are.
The people in question have been abusing their positions "for years" in order to get where they are now. You're very right in your statement that they're "invested" in gaming, most of them being financially invested in one another and profiting from one another's advancement. You're making excuses for their behavior. They are not anonymous trolls. These are people who've built a career by purporting to be, at least outwardly, more professional than some random blogger yammering on in a darkened corner of the internet, but their actions certainly don't merit the respect afforded to professionals. At the very least everyone has the right to call these guys/girls what they are, which would be "jackasses," as un-apologetically as they do the aforementioned trolls. The only distinction between the two is that one has a face and power to sway public opinion while the other is rightfully derided for their actions.
And of course people are taking advantage of the situation (I'm genuinely surprised and heartened to see you mention both sides being in the wrong), that really goes without saying, though whether or not small subsets on either side of the fence behave like petulant children and ignore the focal point of conversation to better suit their aims has little bearing on the evidence being presented. There really is a startling amount floating around, some of it circumstantial, but most goes through a pretty damned rigorous search by multiple people over days. The level of commitment, especially to attempts at verifying what can be verified and openly admitting when something is or isn't circumstantial, we're seeing from all sorts of people on this is sincerely amazing.
I don't think I've seen this many disparate online groups working toward a common goal in...ever. It really is worth taking a look at, just for that reason alone.
Verlander said:
I'm glad you do, but you are aligned with a group of people that are doing criminal acts. Hacking, "doxxing", making bomb and death threats... that's not just one guy, and these things haven't happened just once. Are they gamers doing it? Given it's a gaming situation, I think it's safe to assume so. Is it the 00.05% as you've suggested? Neither of us know that. The verbal abuse is very real, and very very visible.
Firstly, the hacking you're referring to has gone unverified as to who the perpetrators are, in all instances that have yet been seen. Each, in fact, has thrown up major red flags about who would or could be the culprits. I mean... /V/? Seriously? TFYC was hacked, if you didn't know. The charity /v/ was supporting. Look into this, it's disconcerting stuff.
Secondly, I'm not aware of "doxxing" taking place from my "side," however, I've seen examples of your "side" doing it (faraci posting an email) though I may just not have seen that yet. I'm certainly open to seeing examples and, frankly, it's bullshit for anyone to be doing that, no matter where they stand on the issues at hand.
Lastly, Why on earth would you think that people associated with this would make bomb threats to Sony? What does that serve? Who even said they were gamers or what their motivations were/are? Claiming that they're part of the group seeking to root out corruption in gaming journalism, when there is absolutely no evidence to prove it, is ludicrous. The same goes for the death threats, if we're referring to that specific one we've all seen in the...ugh...articles on the subject. If we're referring to general threats? It's pretty damned rampant, but surprisingly not from who you'd think. There are certainly individuals doing it, but the "party line" as it were has been to avoid doing such things and do our utmost to be respectful. I keep seeing a general theme of somebody getting aggressive, then five other people jumping on them or advising them to calm down.
The most vile shit I've seen has actually been from your "side" (threatening the life of a ten year old/entire hash tags devoted to insults), though, again, that's just what I've seen. We're sort of at a disadvantage here, because both of us are having to draw on a certain amount of anecdotal evidence to support our view points.
Again, in any case, the harassment and vitriol is not acceptable. It isn't acceptable from anyone, "sides" be damned.
Verlander said:
No, I've not, and I won't. I'm an enthusiast, but "gamer" has always held a negative connotation for me, now even more so.
I'm sorry you feel that way? I've referred to myself as such since I was ten and never saw any negative connotations in it, aside from what I was being told by society at large, which, coincidentally, is the metaphorical bludgeon that we're being hit with now; the stereotypical image of a fat neckbearded nerd living in his mom's basement.
"Enthusiast" is a perfectly serviceable term though and whatever nomenclature you deem fit to use is entirely up to you.
Verlander said:
The community reacts to a leak about a woman disproportionately, rudely and dangerously. Some figureheads decry this reaction. Now the community is upset that they got called names. You see how ridiculous this sounds? But that's it, boiled down to it's most basic level. It's like the bank robber asking for an apology from the council because they stubbed their toe on the way out.
I've looked into the grievances, yes. They're ridiculous. Even if you all care about journalistic integrity (and I'm prepared to put money that this group of people aren't out protesting against cable news, or bias in music magazines) the reaction and actions of the group are obscene and deserve to be called out. Now, I would never have compared you to ISIS, mostly because as a comparison it doesn't make immediate sense, but the intention behind it stands: if being a "gamer" means that you are the sort of person to create this kind of shitstorm over something so trivial, that you are the kind of person who will hack, abuse and attack in the most despicable way, then that identity needs to be torn down. There's no excuse for it, and while I fully appreciate that YOU have legitimate grievances, and want to discuss and tackle them in a constructive manner, many more don't. They are opportunistic and would be considered a stain in any community.
See, it wasn't that bad at first.
At first, it was just the typical "Oh, ha ha, look at this hypocrite (insert anti-feminist whatever)" shit that crops up from time to time, but once people started really digging into the actual meat of the subject, questions were raised and summarily dismissed by the same people who's ethics were being called into question. And this happened while the mass bans and deletions started...on reddit and 4chan of all places. Deletions of most of 25,000 comments, along with shadow bans, being perpetrated by a reddit mod
while they're speaking directly to the people involved in the controversy...how is that not going to rile people?
The community is upset because their legitimate concerns are being outright brushed aside by, again, the same people who's ethics are being called into question in the first place. The same people who have, since this began, instituted a "fuck you" policy to their userbase and done their utmost to stamp out conflicting opinion, even in their own circles, going so far as to ostracize the ones who don't fall in line...and I'm not even touching the "gamers are over" nonsense.
It should come as no surprise at this point that I don't agree with you. The complaints are not ridiculous. There should not be a politically (on either end of the spectrum) driven narrative, blatant conflicts of interest, cronyism, and incestuous behavior in an industry meant to cover
games of all things. And why on earth would a group of gamers, ideologically diverse people as they are, go on the offensive against general journalistic integrity in major news and cable/music outlets? It isn't our domain, nor is it something we can affect or that affects our chosen hobby. You could no more claim such a thing than you could claim that we should be out rallying against the North Korean government's lack of journalistic integrity. It isn't at all our domain. It isn't about games. This is.
I can understand if you don't view this issue as being important, but it certainly isn't trivial. And the people behaving abhorrently, on both sides, are not to be held up as representations of the whole. Doing so is just dishonest and a means of reducing either group down to its extremes. All people on your "side" are not flailing social justice psychopaths calling for the mass murder of gamers. All people on my "side" are not murderous sexists hell bent on raping Anita Sarkeesian.
I do sincerely appreciate you taking the time to engage with me and apologize for my earlier hubris on the matter, but, like I said from the get go, the likelihood of us seeing eye to eye on this is really quite low...and after weeks of this, I really am quite tired.
