Poll: I want to change the Gamer reputation.

[Dizchu]

Oh, is that why Hot Wheels refuses to condemn doxxing.

https://twitter.com/infinitechan/status/522446920221229056

I'm not sure Hot Wheels defines 8chan as much as Moot defines 4chan. He specifically made the site so people's IPs couldn't be traced. I think it relates to his very libertarian political beliefs or something. He takes "free speech" to a level people like myself wouldn't.

However... he's not encouraging it. I know this sounds like bullshit semantics but it ties in with his beliefs on free speech. "Nothing is sacred except free speech" would probably be his motto. The users of 8chan probably disagree which is why they have tried so hard to get rid of personal information and exposing the people that sent death threats.

But thanks for the tweet. I kinda liked Hot Wheels before (in the Huffpost interview he was pretty spot-on), now it seems that he's a bit of a dick. Hmm, what a shame.

Now some would say "he doesn't represent me. I have two responses to that. First, the fact that people who are pro-gamergate that are okay with that show a lack of unity within it. Secondly, the unwillingness to dissociate from 8chan shows about how much gators who still visit there actually care about "ethics".

They see 8chan as a haven of free speech. 4chan introduced draconian censorship rules concerning Gamergate (c'mon now) because Moot wanted to look good in front of his peers (he won't). At 8chan people won't moderate what they say unless it is absolutely necessary. That's the appeal they see. What I personally don't like is that this spirals into insane conspiracy theories, which is why I've never been to 8chan.

The 8chan mods said that they wouldn't tolerate flooding. I'll edit it in when I find where they said that.

Please do. I like it when the plot thickens. I mean that genuinely, Gamergate has been a series of rabbit holes that seemingly have no end.

There is no credit, they're essentially pro-doxxing because they refuse to condemn it, take down doxxed information, or tolerate attempts to hide doxx information. Anybody who patrons 8chan is showing that they don't actually care about ethics, and right now, its really the closest thing to GamerGate discussion forum.

Define "they". If people tried that hard to get rid of the information then this "they" becomes a quite nebulous group. I'm not sure if it was 8chan or people on another forum that exposed the Brazilian clickbait blogger that sent death threats to Anita Sarkeesian but their contributions have also been swept under the rug. Why not accept good deeds instead of erasing them to make "the narrative" seen more simple?

You know right know there's a gator who is trying to raise money to have a private investigator stalk Zoe Quinn. If you had structure, you could boot him to the curb and make an example of such behavior. But as of now, his membership in GamerGate is as valid as yours.

Now that sounds ridiculous. I'd like a source. I'm not doubting you, people have done ridiculous things as a result of GG, for or against it.

Also I'm not really a "member" of Gamergate. If I'm gonna label myself anything, it's a non-partisan. I don't care if GG succeeds or fails, I personally think it will fail because what they're fighting isn't ethical abuses, it's hypocrisy and the refusal to accept individual responsibility. That's a trait that's common in all kinds of people, not just "SJW"s or "game journalists".

I support Gamergate in the sense that I think it has the right to exist and I am always uneasy with groups being misrepresented, be it gays, atheists, transgenders, people accused of "SJW"-dom or even "Gamergaters".

 

[FPLOON]

Alright... I see what you're trying to do here... Unfortunately, I feel like if I did join this "movement", I would be nothing more than a vocally offline cheerleader, since I'm assuming this would be more of a show than tell in practice... Plus, despite having a Twitter account, I still have no idea how it's suppose to work other that what the PBS Idea Channel said it could do...

Other than that, I do like being kept up-to-date with stuff that interest me, even if I can't really do anything from a practical standpoint, so there's that... (Also, couldn't you technically be part of more than one movement that, in general, wants the same thing, but are approaching it from different [legal] angles? Or is it one of those "you're either with us or not" kind of thing?)

 

[grassgremlin]

Alright... I see what you're trying to do here... Unfortunately, I feel like if I did join this "movement", I would be nothing more than a vocally offline cheerleader, since I'm assuming this would be more of a show than tell in practice... Plus, despite having a Twitter account, I still have no idea how it's suppose to work other that what the PBS Idea Channel said it could do...

Other than that, I do like being kept up-to-date with stuff that interest me, even if I can't really do anything from a practical standpoint, so there's that... (Also, couldn't you technically be part of more than one movement that, in general, wants the same thing, but are approaching it from different [legal] angles? Or is it one of those "you're either with us or not" kind of thing?)

We're approaching it from a different and legal manner.
A civil manner as well. I'm discussing website development and currently mapping down the course of how we can construct.
It'll be handled very differently from Gamergate as well making sure the message is clear from the start and having grounded rules and leadership as well.

 

[grassgremlin]

Thread Updates.

I've created a group. Approval is required for anyone who wants to join.
The codename for our group is #IStandForBatboy created by @ZacharyAmaranth
It's inspired by Weekly World News coverage of Batboy, a fictional mascot for the tabloid news.
Batboy stands for Journalistic Revolution!

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/IStandForBatboy

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

I like the concept you have going here in regard to a website (the hashtag idea is unsalvageable, though. Screw Twitter). However, I can't help but shake this feeling that it won't work quite like you expect.

Too many journalists and indie devs have been quick to cry harassment and villainize anyone who even criticizes them since before the Zoe Quinn scandal, let alone since GG started. It's too likely that those against GG will just claim that it's all part of the same movement or just a smokescreen for GG as well.

Secondly, I don't see too many within GG actually buying into this and dropping the GG label to support this, seeing as how so many of them are content with where they are now. The fact that it's not fighting "SJW"s and the like will also likely be a turnoff for far too many of them, as well as any insistence not to insult their critics with terms like SJW and "Literally Who". GG has a full-on war mentality at this point (as does it's critics) and doesn't care for taking the high-ground, and I don't see them willing to abandon that mindset anytime soon just for the sake of a fresh start that they think would hurt them more than it would help.

Captcha: "way to go!" Well, Captcha supports you. Maybe you're on to something! XD

 

[grassgremlin]

I decided to not ignore 8chan and make contact with them.
Many may object, but I assure you this is the best way we can get the ball rolling.
Instead of avoiding gamergate, I will reason with them and atleast try to get some of the good apples to support this.

 

[Thorn14]

I decided to not ignore 8chan and make contact with them.
Many may object, but I assure you this is the best way we can get the ball rolling.
Instead of avoiding gamergate, I will reason with them and atleast try to get some of the good apples to support this.

>Attempting to reason with 8Chan

Good luck with that.

 

[grassgremlin]

I decided to not ignore 8chan and make contact with them.
Many may object, but I assure you this is the best way we can get the ball rolling.
Instead of avoiding gamergate, I will reason with them and atleast try to get some of the good apples to support this.

>Attempting to reason with 8Chan

Good luck with that.

Yeah, tough call.
Hopefully I'm not shuffling back with arrows in my back, falling over bleeding saying "I've failed."

 

[Nikolaz72]

For me to support any other movement than #Gamergate it'd have to be a neutral one that keeps focused on the ethics and integrity issues, never even discussing feminism because that's not part of the narrative. Not going to join a movement that buys into the biased media smear-campaign because in the end, the neutral movement would be about opposing that exact media.

Just saying that if it ever caught wind and it actually posed a danger to the media narrative they'd just condemn it of consisting og Gamergaters (Which it would at large if it ended up being large enough to be significant) and dismiss it as being mysogynistic. There is no win here unless you have an iron-strong (Prefferably popular on both sides) neutral party starting it. Like TB, or Boogie.

That's all. I'm not at all opposed to this as long as it's neutral and not anti-feminist/anti-gamergate.

 

[ALIENwolve]

Whatever. If you think it can get anything done, I'll be there.

Although the batboy hashtag is kind of derp. Not that I have any constructive suggestions at the moment, though.

 

[Thidran]

Piping in because this particular debate is a waste of time. It will live or die with gamergate. We've already changed tags and they levied the same charges. Same as they'll do with any new tags to put it as plainly as possible. That alone should tell you why it is a bad idea. It makes zero difference.

 

[ZiggyE]

GamerGate's name isn't the issue, it will be continued to be slandered by the very journalists it goes after as they try to cover up their blatant ethics violations. Any new name will just become the GamerGate 2.0 and you'll have people like Sarkeesian tweeting "Don't be fooled, X is just the new GamerGate".

Furthermore, GamerGate has already gained a lot of press and a lot of publicity, good and bad, and is popular. Any new tag will be less popular for some time, which will draw momentum away from the movement.

Any attempt to change the name will cause a drive between the people who want to change and who don't want to change, splitting the movement and ultimately weakening it. This is probably the goal of people who suggest a name change, as I see no one from within GamerGate suggesting a change, only those from outside GamerGate, who suggest the term is unsalvagable, which clearly isn't the case as GamerGate gets more and more support with each passing day.

So no, the name will not be changed. Stop trying to get us to change it.

EDIT: In addition, this did not merit an additional thread. You could've suggested your idea in the mega-thread. Spamming off-topic with GamerGate related threads is not doing anyone any favours. Your opinion is not so special that it merits a new thread.

 

[MerlinCross]

It's a decent idea at the least. Because we've been allowed to discuss it we have the mega thread that keeps getting pointed out and a lot of people talking for and against it. I think if you get enough people to actually sit down and talk it out you might get something rolling.

Be cheering for you to at least create space where we can talk.

 

[MorphBallBomb]

If GamerGate fails. wait a few months, then try this. I will be right behind you, because I am involved in GamerGate due to ethics concerns.

As for strange bedfellows, anon culture/chan culture was an instrumental progenitor for the momentum and tactics of the revolt. If you can't deal with people with a variety of potentially "toxic" points of view (who aren't sending death threats or harassing people) you will fail.

GamerGate has survived as a dysfunctional band of dissonant, pissed off consumers with only one attitude in common: fuck the corrupt gaming press.

If you can be more inclusive than a group full of libertarians, conservatives, liberals, SJWs, MRAs, furries, otherkin, homosexuals, transexuals, atheists, Christians, Jews [Jewish people? what's correct here?], PoC, conspiracy theorists, assholes, nice folk, channers, etc. then you can surpass GamerGate's success.

If you use a hashtag at all, you are vulnerable to the same games that have given GamerGate a bad name.

If you self-select for ideological purity, you will watch your movement eat itself alive.

I think you should join us. We have some weirdos for sure, but if you try to exclude them, you'll never get anybody.
and if you come up with a troll-filter, holy shit let me know.

 

[deathpainter2000]

My question is how do you propose to get the games media to actually update their ethics policy and stick to it? My goal in gamergate has always been to have all of these website implement a standard journalistic ethics policy like this one http://www.nytco.com/who-we-are/culture/standards-and-ethics/

How do you plan on getting these website to update and more importantly follow such a set of guidelines? We don't know the contracts the AAA industry make them sign, we don't know what kind of goodies they send along with their review copies, we don't know what kind of benefits they are getting when publishers fly out the journalists and wine and dine them. So how do you plan on getting rid of these practices? And what is your plan when they inevitably say "NO". Do you plan on doing a letter writing campaign similar to ODN, or a silent boycott? I guess my question is what do you do when negotiations fall apart? And how do you plan on finding out when they are breaking the ethics policies if they are all willing to keep quiet about their own doings?

I'm not asking this to be antagonistic, I really am curious on what your plan is.

 

[Mahemium]

Nah. I'm hoping for Milo's prediction for the GamerGate end game where new media outlets form to supply the demand of gamers who don't care what genitals the protagonists of the new Assassins Creed or Grand Theft Auto games have and don't tell the consumers that they should care. Media outlets that don't signal boost critique videos with fallacious arguments that the consumers don't agree with, but are told they should. Media outlets that don't call some sensationalist garbage stories "news", but other sensationalist garbage stories "private affairs".

It's no skin off my nose if existing outlets don't change policy as long as alternatives arise out of the mess.

 

[StatusNil]

2) Rally against social justice and feminism. This is about video games not political issues!

Yeah, I stopped listening and believing at this. These are notorious covers for the corrupt and disingenuous, and any criticism can and will be painted as just such "rallying".

 

[Requia]

Good fucking luck.
Twitter exists for two reasons, so people can harass each other and so people can make mostly shitty jokes.
People call 4chan the "asshole of the internet" but I think it's twitter.
At least 4chan are self aware.

Assholes serve a vital role and are really fun if you're careful. I'm pretty sure that describes *chan better than Twitter.

 

[totlmstr]

*reviving a surprisingly old account*

I neither support nor condone this idea, but you may be naïve if you think you can splinter to remove the bad seeds. That is not how it works. You will always have them, and there is no stopping them. When you have a group the size of GamerGate, they will pop up like weeds and it is your job as the weedkiller to remove them.

Now, if you were splintering to support similar ideas (like what happened with NotYourShield), then I would be for this ASAP. However, this does not look like to be the case. And, like what Davroth said, "good luck".

 

[Random Gamer]

Ok, I'm late here. That's what happened when you spend too much time in the mega-thread and don't pay enough attention to other threads - if only because I feel some burden the forum and might end up annoying the non-GG readers.

So, I don't think GG is "unsalvageable" or that we should create an "alternate" hashtag.
On the other hand, I posted just last night that creating one, or possibly two, hashtags / groups / whatever that would allow discussion between everyone on some of the core issues would be good.
We obviously need de-escalation - as what happened to Felicia Day shows without any doubt -, and having something where we could directly address the others' concerns, where each side can show that many on one's side share concerns of the "other side" - though they're not making it their own core issue in this specific debate - seems a good thing.

We can hope the most radicals who don't care about anyone on the other side will stay away from it and not crap on the new grouping, and won't try to derail it.

That said, I don't think discussion can happen in Twitter only, because GG has proven that this thing is unredeemable, alas. Even IRC allows for better less heated discussion :/ Though Twitter is good to raise awareness and popularize the notion of speaking to each other, though obviously the hashtag has to be a thing there if we want this to work.

And a word of warning: trolls will still be there, and the few extremists on both sides who doxxed and sent threats will still be there. Even with discussions, we should expect some of this awful shit to go on - either because somme want to derail discussions to let the bloodbath go on, or because they don't give a fuck about them. History has shown countless times that "peace process" have to deal with provocations. At least, a new hashtag designed to allow common discussion can also be a place where both sides can easily denounce that shit.

Last but not least: it should also be quite clear that if we ("we" as in people on both sides) engage in this, it's not a sign of weakness on any side, or a sign one side fears defeat and wants to save face - that shouldn't be the case, and it should be clear that this isn't why anyone on any side is engaging with this.
(I added this last paragraph specifically because if some people on one side feel the other does this because it fears being crushed, this will taint the way they approach the discussion, some being tempted to take advantage of it)