- May 9, 2012
I'm... not sure what you're trying to say here.delroland said:There is no argument, there is just the petulant shouting of which I, and many others, are so sick and tired at this point. Arguing with GG is like arguing with a wall which changes its paint job on a nearly daily basis.CaptainMarvelous said:Serious question: Do you genuinely believe that your inverted commas "side" argues better than the GG people?delroland said:Good job deflecting the actual point. Not like I haven't seen that before. Typical GG tactic: spam their detractors with words that really have no meaning then beg the question.Riot3000 said:That is interesting one how do you know that a majority of gg is white and why would that matter in fact white males make up a majority of both sides so really that whole distinction means what now?delroland said:I use caricature simply because I find nothing serious to take in their stance, and I'm tired of explaining it to people who won't listen. Also, by your definition of immaturity I am well within my rights to point it out in a group that paints their opponents as "LW#" or "SJW" or "left-wing radical". Furthermore, while it is given that GG is not entirely made up of white males, they certainly make up the overwhelming majority. Hell, I'm a white male, and I don't have this sense of entitlement that GG seems to have. It's like they've never read "The And and the Grasshopper", or even seen the Disney adaptation; maybe they could learn a thing or two from it.Gorrath said:I find this sort of thing to be fascinating. There's a certain mindset that leads to one boiling a movement down to a series of derogatory statements and that mindset is one I've never been able to wrap my head around. I find it particularly interesting that you refer to them as "babies", since your message conveys the idea that you, yourself are engaging in the most juvenile behavior imaginable. I also find it extraordinary that you seem to think everyone who is pro GG is a male or white. I don't imagine you actually believe that though; I am thinking it's just easier to ignore the actual makeup of the group so you can engage in a bit of slamming white males.delroland said:Actually, that's exactly what I came for, as well as to see the garglegoat bandwagon whine like the misogynist white male privilege babies they are.piscian said:Bob, dude, seriously...
It's your show and technically you can do whatever you want but regardless of ideological difference NO ONE came here to listen to you rant about this issue. Do yourself a favor and take this discussion to another outlet unless you want to alienate viewers who enjoy the big picture for discussing geek nostalgia and other "fun" topics.
I'm not being devious when I say it is fascinating though; I really do find it interesting how people can set their minds this way. The harshness of my criticism is because I also find it deplorable. And surely it doesn't matter, but I am not pro GG myself. I simply find that your description of that movement to be so wacky that it makes a caricature of you more than them.
I also can't stand GG apologists who "aren't pro-GG" yet don't hesitate to rise to their defense at every opportunity. Where are the criticisms of the ridiculous and short sighted demands made by GG that wouldn't actually fix anything that they purport to want fixed? The lack of such criticisms demonstrates a clear bias toward supporting GG.
(I'm talking about you.)
Also you brought up that scary word entitlement another casualty in a long list of words that have been over used and have lost all meaning at this point.
I mean you say you are not entitled yet here you are mad at people who don't share the same hate or level of distaste for something the same as you or the way want them to. And yet you say your are not entitled is really hilarious. For real you come off like a bizarro world version of the thing you despise.
"You hate GG because GG hates women. I see no distinction between the two; don't you think hate is wrong?" /trollface
"Hey, I'm not pro-GG, but here's why your argument is wrong. Sure, GG's arguments might be wrong, too, but who really knows? Let's not ask. EVER." /trollface
From my understanding, the incredibly successful destruction of GamerGate (I'm sorry GG people but it's true, your name has been so thoroughly smeared it's near impossible to use. It's the same thing that happened to feminism) was an ad hominem declaring it misogynistic. Misogynistic or no, that has been what the discussion is about now because it gives the anti- side a better narrative,
No one outside of GG destroyed GG; it was destroyed from within and doomed to failure due to its toxic nature and origins. There are some things you don't recover from, and making death threats against your detractors is one of those things. That's an automatic loss; it doesn't matter how much you apologize or try to make it better.
Furthermore, an ad hominem attack is only an attack if the negative character portrayed is irrelevant to the conversation. If we criticize Jeffrey Skilling when he gives investment advice, that is not ad hominem. It is common sense. So too when we accuse GG of misogyny in its desire to "keep feminism/liberalism/whatever" out of its games, that is not ad hominem because the previous activities of GG are completely relevant to the current conversation.
You don't get to cry, "AD HOMINEM!" just because you don't like the ramifications of criticism of your group to your argument.
GG started with a premise that Games Journalism was displaying signs of corruption and bias which was kicked off by an issue involving a female developer. Unfortunately, there are people involved in that who made the entire thing seem misogynistic. The rest of them do still have an argument, but it got mired in ad hominem to the point that NOBODY ADDRESSED THEIR ARGUMENT. That's what I mean, the counter-point to journalism might be corrupt wasn't "it isn't because of X" it was "YOU HATE WOMEN!". From a purely logical perspective, that isn't a response and denying they have something to respond to is also not a response. The anti-feminist view is not one I've ever seen projected by anyone from the GG crowd (though I'm sure quotes can be found if one looks hard enough).
If death threats against your detractors are an automatic loss then I would like your opinion on Christina Hoff Summers and the various death threats she received from the anti-GG side? Both sides are guilty of this, in fact both sides are guilty of this towards WOMEN. Or so it's alleged, if you think one side is lying then it stands to reason the other is too so either way it'd be a moot point.
That latest showing on David Pakman was probably the most depressing outing I've seen so far but sadly indicative of what seems to be the arguing style.
See, here's the thing, I don't care that much about GG. I just don't. It'll get under my skin if I let it, all I can do is make a note which 'internet celebrities' decided gamers are dead and make like a corpse and not give them my ad money. Country I live in I honestly don't care or need to care that much.
But at the same time, I am pissed off that the other side of this debate seems to continuously use logical fallacies and deny the other side even EXISTS for the sake of saying they won the argument or condescending to them.
I like being neutral, I want to protect it.
So I would appreciate if we could see some actual dialogue because at the moment I'm seeing a lot of smug insults and not a lot of rebuttals. If we have to talk about it, am I asking too much that we talk about it like fucking adults?