Over 1,800 Gaming Professionals Condemn Hate Speech in Open Letter

[licktheenvelope]

Ugh... i'm glad the devs are paying attention but seriously they need to get the press to call off the social extremists.

Social extremists? The statement says "Diversity is good, please report harassment when you see it, make online communities a more fun place to be." What is so extreme about that?

Note how it's not signed by Anita Sarkeesian... EDIT: Zoe Quinn on. 1 more. Hopefully that quells the extremists.

What does that have to do with anything? Why does everything about everything in gaming have to come back to those two nowadays?

There's no short answer to that. See the thread: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.858347-Zoe-Quinn-and-the-surrounding-controversy?page=447

There's a number of issues of nepotism and corruption involving both Ms Sarkeesian and Ms Quinn and a certain PR agency.

 

[licktheenvelope]

Ugh... i'm glad the devs are paying attention but seriously they need to get the press to call off the social extremists.

Social extremists? The statement says "Diversity is good, please report harassment when you see it, make online communities a more fun place to be." What is so extreme about that?

Note how it's not signed by Zoe Quinn or Anita Sarkeesian...

Quinn did sign it actually along with Adam Orth. Ironically an individual from mainstream gaming that lost his job after being downright imbecilic to the gaming population at large.

Yes I edit that, Quinn had noted signed as of a couple hours ago.

 

[Erttheking]

Ugh... i'm glad the devs are paying attention but seriously they need to get the press to call off the social extremists.

Social extremists? The statement says "Diversity is good, please report harassment when you see it, make online communities a more fun place to be." What is so extreme about that?

Note how it's not signed by Anita Sarkeesian... EDIT: Zoe Quinn on. 1 more. Hopefully that quells the extremists.

What does that have to do with anything? Why does everything about everything in gaming have to come back to those two nowadays?

There's no short answer to that. See the thread: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.858347-Zoe-Quinn-and-the-surrounding-controversy?page=447

There's a number of issues of nepotism and corruption involving both Ms Sarkeesian and Ms Quinn and a certain PR agency.

Yeah, that's not happening. I'm not crawling through 400 pages of barely contained rage, uncertain accusations and out of control emotions. It'd be like walking into the middle of a riot and trying to get an unbiased view on what was going on.

 

[Stewie Plisken]

This does not reflect my personal experience with the term "gamer" and the community that uses it. But I do get where you're coming from; the point is that it's a term that applies to anyone that plays games regardless of gender, sex, race, political affiliation etc. and the recent consistent efforts to tear it down are not helping anyone and especially the plead of those developers.

We should use the term for everyone, yes, but I'd argue some people don't -- and enough don't for it to be an ugly, uninviting sore point on the community. For example, have you ever heard someone refer to some gamers as "casual gamers"? Others go on to say those "casuals" aren't real gamers. In fact, a thread on the Escapist recently, regarding the population of female gamers had several people ponder aloud if they were "real gamers" or just played casual, "iPhone" games. I can dig some quotes up for you if you like, but I imagine you've seen them as well.

No doubt the term gamer should be used freely by anyone that enjoys video games. But our community could use some work on just how we address some of our fellow video game lovers.[/quote]

The difference here, though, is that one can easily be a self-identified "gamer". Worst-case-scenario they will run into some elitist prick that will mock them, but they still won't be able to remove that title from them. Even that scenario is comparetively rare in the community. The question of casual gamers vs hardcore gamers isn't new and while it's been applied now between mobile games and traditional games, five or eight years ago the same debate was happening in regards to traditional games and the Wii shovelware. The term is constantly redefined, because it's tied to technology and its progress, hence the various similar debates, but there isn't an actual need (or push) for distinction between gamers.

This destinction exists, mind you, but this has always been the case. For all intends and purposes I'm a casual gamer, because I don't spend a ridiculous amount of money on all the available systems. Before that, I was a casual gamer, because I wouldn't complete every single on of the hundreds of quests in Baldur's Gate 2, like many completionists would.

In the medium's current form, the countless people I even overhear talking about Fruit Ninja or Flappy Bird have put money in the industry and have welcomed its effects and distinctions from other forms of entertainment. They may themselves be defined as "casual" gamers, but they are gamers nonetheless.

 

[BinaryFinary]

Ugh... i'm glad the devs are paying attention but seriously they need to get the press to call off the social extremists.

Social extremists? The statement says "Diversity is good, please report harassment when you see it, make online communities a more fun place to be." What is so extreme about that?

Note how it's not signed by Anita Sarkeesian... EDIT: Zoe Quinn on. 1 more. Hopefully that quells the extremists.

What does that have to do with anything? Why does everything about everything in gaming have to come back to those two nowadays?

Maybe because no one reporting on this issue, just like the OP, can avoid linking what was a neutral 'everyone stop harassing everyone else' open letter to stories about either 'Gamer is dead' or in this case a pure bias 'Critical Distance' thought dump.

 

[BinaryFinary]

Yeah, that's not happening. I'm not crawling through 400 pages of barely contained rage, uncertain accusations and out of control emotions. It'd be like walking into the middle of a riot and trying to get an unbiased view on what was going on.

Of course not that would destroy your world view once you discover that it is generally (beyond first 20 pages) a place of civil discussion, little rage and thoughtful concerns.

 

[Erttheking]

Yeah, that's not happening. I'm not crawling through 400 pages of barely contained rage, uncertain accusations and out of control emotions. It'd be like walking into the middle of a riot and trying to get an unbiased view on what was going on.

Of course not that would destroy your world view once you discover that it is generally (beyond first 20 pages) a place of civil discussion, little rage and thoughtful concerns.

Question. Did you think that insulting me would make me more likely to read the thread? Because it didn't.

 

[Stewie Plisken]

But what of those dismissing female gamers for only playing iPhone games and the such? Did you see the thread I am referring to? Surely this behaviour is an issue and this is the one I am addressing. I agree the term gamer can be used by anyone and should include anyone that wishes to join our community. But that doesn't change the fact that a large enough group of people aren't in agreement with us on the issue.

No, I didn't see that thread, but I've seen similar, I know the issue you're referring to and I'm not really in disagreement with you. Regardless of dissent from people who disagree with the opinion that mobile games aren't real games, well, they're real games. There is a valid discussion there, if only to avoid gaming becoming homogenous; meaning the distinction is necessary to make sure no game developers pull a Windows 8 on us.

But I don't consider it an issue within the community, despite the voices that disagree, exactly because of how broad the term is. Ignore these people; they won't go away, but they have literally no power. Can't stop progress. This is still a far cry from dismissing the term and the people that it defined or at least described for all those years.

Yeah, that's not happening. I'm not crawling through 400 pages of barely contained rage, uncertain accusations and out of control emotions. It'd be like walking into the middle of a riot and trying to get an unbiased view on what was going on.

Of course not that would destroy your world view once you discover that it is generally (beyond first 20 pages) a place of civil discussion, little rage and thoughtful concerns.

Question. Did you think that insulting me would make me more likely to read the thread? Because it didn't.

In all fairness, your devaluation of a discussion that has been going on for two weeks warranted a heated response. You can't ask for civil discourse when you're not willing to provide it yourself.

 

[castlewise]

We believe that everyone, no matter what gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or religion has the right to play games, criticize games and make games without getting harassed or threatened. It is the diversity of our community that allows games to flourish.

We agree. Hence the term "gamer", which is all-inclusive.

Just to pull you up there - the term gamer isn't inclusive or exclusive. No more than, say, police officer or student. There was a time when women couldn't be police officers and African American's couldn't attend schools (I can provide sources if you would like them). So the terms police officer and student weren't inclusive and the terms themselves didn't mean "no blacks" or "no women" but none the less, people were excluded. See, it's not the title that is inclusive or exclusive, it's the community and the culture.

"Person" isn't all-inclusive today depending on which individual or group of people you wish to have define it. What's your point? Because it seems like you're being flippant for the sake of being flippant.

Could you show me which group you have seen saying person is not an inclusive term?

Well, if we're being entirely pedantic, the very existence of the term "Person of Color" (though as near as I can tell, it's fallen out of favour in the last few years) would suggest the term "Person" only applies to Caucasians.

But more on topic, I have to agree with the sentiment that this petition seems to be missing an important point, which is that the toxicity isn't exclusively found in those who play games, as we've seen with the behaviour of various game developers and journalists with regard to this entire debacle.

You bring up an example, but then refute it. Care to try again? I would very much like to see sources that show people rejecting the term person or claiming it doesn't include all humans. You made the claim after all.

Woah there, I made no such claim, and I'd appreciate you not accuse me of as much.

I merely pointed out that by definition, the existence of the term "Person of color" necessarily implies that the one using it excludes non-whites from the term "person".

Captcha: Trust me.

Well, ideally you'd do your own research and reach your own conclusions, but I try to be pretty trustworthy, so thank you, Captcha.

You claimed, and I will quote you again:

"Person" isn't all-inclusive today depending on which individual or group of people you wish to have define it.

So could you please show me an example you have seen that demonstrates a group of people claiming the word person is not inclusive. If you have come to that conclusion (and you have, as I just quoted you saying it again) then you must have seen or head it. Please share.

I have one. Its super depressing! During the Soviet era the USSR would define groups of people they didn't like as "non-persons", disqualifying them from access to things like food (because of communism). http://www.holodomorct.org/history.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Holodomor

 

[dragoongfa]

Yeah, that's not happening. I'm not crawling through 400 pages of barely contained rage, uncertain accusations and out of control emotions. It'd be like walking into the middle of a riot and trying to get an unbiased view on what was going on.

Of course not that would destroy your world view once you discover that it is generally (beyond first 20 pages) a place of civil discussion, little rage and thoughtful concerns.

Thoughtful concerns, like how DARPA is behind some sort of wide-reaching feminist megaplot.

That was a sarcastic joke and pulling the leg of the 'conspiracy theorist' tag gamers often got.

The Silverstring angle and the UGF though?

Now that's a real scandal and is the ground for fraud and racketeering charges to be brought forward.

 

[Stewie Plisken]

But what of those dismissing female gamers for only playing iPhone games and the such? Did you see the thread I am referring to? Surely this behaviour is an issue and this is the one I am addressing. I agree the term gamer can be used by anyone and should include anyone that wishes to join our community. But that doesn't change the fact that a large enough group of people aren't in agreement with us on the issue.

No, I didn't see that thread, but I've seen similar, I know the issue you're referring to and I'm not really in disagreement with you. Regardless of dissent from people who disagree with the opinion that mobile games aren't real games, well, they're real games. There is a valid discussion there, if only to avoid gaming becoming homogenous; meaning the distinction is necessary to make sure no game developers pull a Windows 8 on us.

But I don't consider it an issue within the community, despite the voices that disagree, exactly because of how broad the term is. Ignore these people; they won't go away, but they have literally no power. Can't stop progress. This is still a far cry from dismissing the term and the people that it defined or at least described for all those years.

I can see what you're saying; I too enjoy there being a distinction between something like Wii Sport and Civilization. We agree that the issue is an undesirable group shunning people that enjoy the former and not the latter, but I wouldn't say we are best served by ignoring them. I think open, frank, honest discussion is the only way to move forward. If I'm not convincing you of that, that's fine. We can handle the issue our separate ways. Hopefully one of us brings about some goodness. I think this will be an interesting topic to come back to in, say, a year, to compare and look over how far we've come.

Fair enough, but the problem I find with the course of a discussion is that at least one side will be underrepresented, as people who play on mobile usually don't visit forums or sites like this one.

Having said that, the distinction between casual and hardocre (or even fake and real) has always been incomplete. As far as I'm concerned, a casual gamer is one that doesn't go to lengths to satisfy their gaming needs. A gamer that buys a sports game or Call of Duty once a year and after they leave college they will most likely not game until they have kids (and if then) is just as much of a casual gamer as the one that plays Flappy Bird. That's the only discussion I can see getting somewhere: the distinction shouldn't be done based on the game, but rather the gamer. And needless to say that neither style of gamer is lesser than the other.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Over 2100 gamers have also condemned hate speech!


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

Hurray for them too! Yay, gamers...umm...no?

Ok

 

[Fangface74]

As a gamer, this is my response:

An open letter to the Gaming Industry

We believe that everyone, no matter what gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or religion has the right to create games, regardless of content without getting harassed or threatened. It is the diversity of your community that allows games to flourish, without being told what a game should or should not contain. If a game is created containing material that is considered offensive, then gamers can vote with their wallet, and not buy it, censorship leaves behind more than it brings.

If you see threats of misogyny/misandry, or comments about shutting Steam, YouTube, Twitch, Twitter, Facebook or reddit down for an hour, please take a minute to report them on the respective sites.

If you see controlling/censoring, harassing speech, take a public stand against it, open a dialogue and make the gaming community a more enjoyable space to be in.

Thank you

 

[Something Amyss]

Come on, concern for the devs is only a prop for behaving terribly.

Nobody's going to be persuaded by this.

I suppose it's nice to see that a bunch of devs aren't complete asshats, though.

 

[Weaver]

While I agree with the letter, it seems to wholly ignore people outside the 'gaming community' harassing people in it and commenting on it. I've seen videos from both feminists and MRAs with no interest in gaming who clearly don't understand what's going on - based on the muddled retelling of the situation in their videos - feel they need to weigh in and get into the fight on twitter anyways.

What of them?

The obvious issue is the dichotomic wording of this statement:

We believe that everyone, no matter what gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or religion has the right to play games, criticize games and make games without getting harassed or threatened.

It also seems worded that the critics and developers are never harassing people and are always being harassed. And yes, I do believe re-tweeting someone knowing your hundreds of thousands - if not millions - of followers will gang up on them is harassment even if you're not directly doing it.

It's, again, reinforcing this "us vs. them" mentality that is pissing everyone off. The attitude of "We're journalists, developers, critics and e-celebrities. We talk at you, and you don't get to talk back - especially if you disagree!" has finally reached a boiling point.

 

[synobal]

Woo good for them I guess? I don't understand. I can post a letter condemning "doing things that make people sad" but that doesn't actually change anything and don't see how signing it changes anything.

 

[Covarr]

Over 1,800 gaming professionals attach their name to a letter condemning hate speech in search of positive publicity, but don't actually feel very strongly about it either way.

P.S. Thanks

 

[kael013]

K. Thor Jensen - (Videogames Journalist)

Spoiler

Yeah, because this is definitely a subject that calls for mass extermination of people based on a fucking hobby. I'm appalled and utterly disgusted by this - no, those words are insufficient. I don't think there [i/]are[/i] any words that can properly convey my feelings at that. Gamers aren't human? Gamers should be exterminated? Yeah, let's recreate the Holocaust over a DAMN HOBBY!

Also, doesn't he realize that calling for all gamers to be executed would also include the feminists, journalists, and developers(including himself)?

OT: Well, it's the right sentiment (vaguely worded and missing some points, but still the right sentiment), but they aren't calling for enough action, so, ultimately, I feel this will be pointless. If reporting harassment was all it took to ensure the cooler heads could prevail we'd have exterminated all the trolls years ago. Too many topics have become too intertwined and everyone, regardless of side, seems to have been reduced to mud-slinging. We need to do something drastic.

 

[Rozalia1]

To the... "anti corruption" gang or whatever they call themselves right now... are you really still getting worked by this? Whatever wrong they apparently committed is now pretty much irrelevant, by your whining and attitude you have been rendered whiny uncool heels who if you're not aware fill the purpose of being someone who others want to see get beaten.

You don't punish a heel by turning them face buddies. You take the abuse until you can avenge yourself at the big money match on PPV, not DQ every single match for a month straight as nobody wants to see that.

 

[Someone Depressing]

"Assholes are bad and you should tell on them."

Um, ok. It's a start, I suppose, but it's so vague and broad that it's hard to talk about it, because... well, it's shaped like itself. It's got no connotations or anything of its own. In other words, like many of the other petitions popping up here and there. The only difference is that this one's gotten much more support.

At least the one petitioning to black out Steam was original, if a little dumb (read: the stupidest, most brain dead thing I've ever read) but this is just telling people to do what they're already doing.

Which is... good? Maybe. I think.