The Big Picture: Remembering the Real Jack Thompson

[bobdole1979]

He denies that it impacted the coverage which in Kotaku's case is true no coverage on Kotaku (bar possibly the Game Jam piece which unless Matt Lesham comes forward we'll never know) was at fault. But Nathan Grayson didn't always work at Kotaku.

He doesn't deny they had a relationship as the later parts of the statement show just that said relationship didn't impact his coverage while at Kotaku

well problem solved then he denies it effected his coverage. Unless you can prove that it did effect his coverage we are done here then.

 

[The Deadpool]

He denies that it impacted the coverage which in Kotaku's case is true no coverage on Kotaku (bar possibly the Game Jam piece which unless Matt Lesham comes forward we'll never know) was at fault. But Nathan Grayson didn't always work at Kotaku.

His statement is that he found no evidence of ANY of it. So he is kinda denying the whole statement.

Now, I find it pretty safe bet she DID sleep with him, I'm just saying that the statement, as given, is pretty much a denial of any and all wrongdoing.

It is a fact that more women saw and enjoyed the Notebook then Expendbles and vice versa.

It's a fact? How many? How many women enjoyed the Expendable and how many women enjoyed the Notebook?

But please point out how that is sexist

It reinforces the preconceived myth that women are incapable of enjoying action movies?

 

[tyriless]

Thus you look for a link between the two. You find a link. "OMG, she get's mentioned in the coding!" or something, whatever, (if you have to highlight two words in block of text it's pretty tenuous) and you go "They were in cahoots the whole time."

Next that block of text is actually a thank you message coded into the Depression Quest Website itself, with a few other names a couple of which might be recognizable too such as the head editor of Gamasutra for example.

Again, you are really fishing in deep waters here and reeling in next to nothing. You know in the conspiracy movies where there is a wall filled with photographs and newspaper articles and it's all connected by thin bits of strings? That's what you are presenting here, except a little more ludicrous.

What made people jump on the case wasn't so much what happened but how it was handled. I mean this would have been a fly by night gossip story but instead we had DMCA abuse we had hit pieces we had "I do not negotiate with terrorists" we had mass censorship of the discussion and people went "Hold on, hold on something is not right at all here" Then we had The Fine Young Capitalists show up with the accusation of doxxing and media blackouts because Zoe disliked them.

No it got handled in that manner because a bunch people came to slut shame an Indie Developer based on a jilted ex-lover's hearsay (and private communication he posted, which is a really scumbag thing to do). Seeing how this tenuous link was "exposed" with parading out the sexual liaison of one woman, I can see how the initial reaction was "Nope that's none of mine or your business." Especially when Zoe Quinn's name is being dragged through the mud for no good reason (the reason being this conspiracy of coverage you keep alluding to happening). As far as name being dragged through the mud how about that comic Shredded Moose did where she gave a blowjob for a better rating? Pretty good example of the story that GamerGate was pushing forward and apparently, with you, is still pushing forward. I almost linked it here, but eff that guy. It's not likely safe and would be inconsiderate of me to post a link to here anyways.

However that narrative is what the websites wanted to avoid. Sadly, it resulted in the opposite, as the whole thing blown up in everyone's face, but that is because they underestimated how god-awful the people who started GamerGate could be.

What they discovered was there was next to no evidence for the initial bout of harassment Zoe claimed to have received from Wizardchan and many of the stories were flawed. The more people circled the wagons the more people wondered why and dug in to those so determined to defend this.

It's funny, there is next to no evidence that Zoe slept with Nathan for positive coverage, but you totally jumped on THAT conspiracy band wagon...hmmm.

Sex = not a bad thing
Using Sex to get ahead = yeh kinda a bit of a dick move as it means it's no longer about the quality of the work anymore.

So you assume that she had sex for exposure then rather than for the sheer pleasure of it. Apparently, men and woman can't have sex because they enjoy it. Last time I checked, most people bang because it's fun, there is an emotional connection, or a biological urge, which is far more likely what happened here then for some form of profit or notoriety. Because let's look at this article. It was written before she and Nathan had that interlude that they both admitted too. Sure, you could say that had sex with him beforehand, but you don't know that. Zoe Quinn, Nathan, and Eron Gjon all speak of this one incident and no other, so the likelihood it happened before is slim. But let's say it did happen, just for your argument's sake: what is the end result: a one paragraph blurb where her game get's mentioned (not her name either, just her game), along with two other games. Suddenly your conspiracy looks like this: Zoe Quinn may of, but most likely didn't, sleep with Nathan Grayson before he wrote this blurb that positively mentions her game as "a Twine Darling" along with two other games he also separately brings up getting Green-Lit on Steam (a game by the way which is free on Steam).
So yes, this is pretty tenuous stuff.

Move on, because every time you bring this up, you are looking more like the side of GamerGate that everyone in GamerGate PRETENDS doesn't exist. I thought you guys weren't supposed be bringing up Zoe Quinn anyway. For a group that's supposed to be moving on, you are doing a really poor job representing it.

People asked about this, I'm answering. why is it someone else brings it up people answer then someone goes "Stop bringing it up" maybe the other side might want to stop asking about it ?

Yeah, you could totally stop responding or go, "I don't care about Zoe Quinn. It turned out she had little or nothing to do with actual journalism ethics," rather than continuing to defend GamerGate's reasoning to attack her and smear her name. Yet you feel compelled to continue to justify what has happened to her, as if you really don't think she is a human being that deserves same respect as everyone else does.

People asked I'm giving answers and while you might not believe it the stuff that came up after the Nathan Grayson stuff is far more damning and far more of an ethical concern with far more impact on multiple people including people trying to silence someone making accusations of sexual assault.

Well we at least you admit this whole thing should be more about Nathan Grayson than Zoe Quinn. However, based on what you deem as acceptable evidence of the two colluding for positive coverage, I'm doubt anyone other than the usual GG brigade is going give your arguments against him any serious thought. So far, out of the half dozen GamerGate people I spoke to the only conspiracy that's held any real weight was IndieCade.

 

[bobdole1979]

He denies that it impacted the coverage which in Kotaku's case is true no coverage on Kotaku (bar possibly the Game Jam piece which unless Matt Lesham comes forward we'll never know) was at fault. But Nathan Grayson didn't always work at Kotaku.

His statement is that he found no evidence of ANY of it. So he is kinda denying the whole statement.

Now, I find it pretty safe bet she DID sleep with him, I'm just saying that the statement, as given, is pretty much a denial of any and all wrongdoing.

It is a fact that more women saw and enjoyed the Notebook then Expendbles and vice versa.

It's a fact? How many? How many women enjoyed the Expendable and how many women enjoyed the Notebook?

But please point out how that is sexist

It reinforces the preconceived myth that women are incapable of enjoying action movies?

easy box office returns. Its a fact that more women viewed The Notebook and more men viewed Expendbles.

No it doesn't do that at all. Women are freely able to enjoy the Expendbles and Men are freely able to enjoy the Notebook however simple facts show which audience enjoyed which movie more.

Good try at trolling kid.

 

[The Deadpool]

easy box office returns.

Oh good. What IS it? What's the number?

facts show which audience enjoyed which movie more.

Actually, simple facts show who WATCHED it more.

Even then, you did not say "more women DID in fact enjoy the movie." You said merely being woman would be enough to make someone like one movie over the other. Which isn't really proven by box office numbers.

 

[sexy=sexist]

Did Zoe Quinn file a false DMCA to try and censor anyone? Can this be proven?

 

[The Deadpool]

Did Zoe Quinn file a false DMCA to try and censor anyone? Can this be proven?

Actually, that one is pretty safely proven. Someone put a video about the whole "Quinnspiracy" thing (god I hate that name) and she filed a DMCA to take the video down from youtube. She claimed it infringed on her game's copyright, but the video was a still picture with a voice over. And that picture was promotional material for the game.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm not claiming that Feminist Frequency is sabotaging feminism, rather they do more damage to the image of feminism than to the image of gaming.

But when it came to Gamergaters giving the whole a bad name, you were outraged. You called for personal responsibility and said THEY, the dreaded THEY were against personal responsibility. Now you're....concerned that people are getting a bad name? Why not just stick to personal responsibility, which you claim Gamergate is about?

Feminist Frequency are a microcosm of Tumblr feminism.

Itself an unwarranted generalisation. Based on a stereotype. Sort of like the "angry white males" thing that set GGers into a tizzy.

You probably don't want to hear "Gamergate is a microcosm of gamers as angry white males," so why would you visit it elsewhere?

 

[Dizchu]

But when it came to Gamergaters giving the whole a bad name, you were outraged. You called for personal responsibility and said THEY, the dreaded THEY were against personal responsibility. Now you're....concerned that people are getting a bad name? Why not just stick to personal responsibility, which you claim Gamergate is about?

I get annoyed when Gamergate gets generalised via a stereotype, just like with feminism. When people claiming to speak for Gamergate spread ridiculous conspiracy theories and lies, it's bad for their "movement". Just like with feminism.

Gamergate is actually very similar to feminism in structure. Gamergate claims to be about one thing (journalistic ethics) and the belief in that one thing is the only clear qualification for entry. Feminism claims to be about one thing (gender equality/women's rights), that too is the only necessary belief. Beyond that peoples' beliefs are extremely dissonant, they can be all over the political spectrum, they can even be downright fascistic.

But people attacking Gamergate have claimed it has used the ethics thing as a cover-up for harassment. People that attack feminism claim the equality thing is a cover-up for conspiracy theories and misandry. Now I have a similar relationship with both GG and feminism. I don't outright call myself a participant in either but I am an ally of people that identify with each that have views I agree with.

When we give Feminist Frequency attention it inevitably detracts from the countless moderate feminists out there. When we give trolls (who don't even identify with GG) attention when GG discussion is getting heated, it detracts from the moderates within GG. I wanted people to be held accountable and for people not to rely on guilt-by-association to win arguments. Yeah I used a nebulous "they" in that argument. I screwed up.

Feminist Frequency are a microcosm of Tumblr feminism.

Itself an unwarranted generalisation. Based on a stereotype. Sort of like the "angry white males" thing that set GGers into a tizzy.

How come? The stereotype exists for a reason, a certain problematic form of feminism has made its home on Tumblr. The kind that devalues the agency of women and treats patriarchy like a conspiracy. The most ridiculous views are the ones that get the most attention (for better or for worse). Feminist Frequency continue to get exposure for two reasons. Their backlash and the ridiculous, provocative things they say. Not in their videos but in their social media interactions. The stuff they've said about Bayonetta 2 is like people claiming Family Guy is Illuminati propaganda.

You probably don't want to hear "Gamergate is a microcosm of gamers as angry white males," so why would you visit it elsewhere?

Feminist Frequency have very specific views that can (and should be) ridiculed. Gamergate is filled with people with wildly varying beliefs, the only constant factor is the ethics part (which I don't even agree with but it's what they claim to believe).

 

[Netrigan]

and I'd rather a reviewer not feel the need to bow to pressure for "people like you" nor score to appeal to "people like you" who want everything to only fit a specific political ideology and don't want to dare step outside the nice warm hugbox and let art do what art always has and always will keep doing because it should. Offend people.

Yes, the horrible pressure I exert on reviewers to follow their judgment and review the game in whatever manner they think appropriate... even if I completely disagree with them.

How fucking horrible of me. I'm a fucking monster. I really should be setting up a set of really narrow rules they must follow and screech like a howler monkey every time they dare step foot outside those boundaries like you're doing.

If you review games, then you should it however you deem appropriate and you should not bow down to outside pressures to change your opinion. The only way I'd label it as violating "journalistic ethics" is if I think an outside force compromised your principles, that someone exerted undue pressure on your to raise or lower your score.

And this is my objection to GamerGate putting its dick into the review process. If they focused on those examples where a review was compromised by outside forces, I'd be on your side in this matter. But GamerGate is waging war on opinions they disagree with... and, again, fuck that. Fuck that as hard as anything has ever been fucked before. Operation Bayonetta is fucking obscene and an attempt to skull fuck the very concept of Journalistic Ethics in game reviews.

 

[Something Amyss]

Feminist Frequency have very specific views that can (and should be) ridiculed. Gamergate is filled with people with wildly varying beliefs, the only constant factor is the ethics part (which I don't even agree with but it's what they claim to believe).

But the stereotype exists for a reason.

Your own logic, no less.

 

[Netrigan]

And there are far too many people encouraging them to lie about that reaction. Maybe it's the politically correct forces you complain about, who want said reviewer to lie about having fun and espouse all the right politics. Maybe it's fan who doesn't give a rat's ass that Halo 8's single player campaign is a piece of shit, the game deserves a 10/10 for its multiplayer alone. Maybe it's the corporate masters who don't want to spend advertising dollars to a site that says their games suck.

And fuck all those people. And fuck anyone who wants to inject even more bullshit into the system by demanding game reviews conform to their preferences. Not every game review is aimed at you. They should express a wide variety of opinions. Sites like Metacritic are nothing more than a tool, a place to give a general sense of the reaction and link you to a bunch of different reviews to help the consumer. It should never, ever be tied to bonuses.

You just hit the point of absurdity.
"No every game review is aimed at the customer"

That's what game reviews are for to inform customers

You know what, I agree this is the point of absurdity.

I said, "Not every game review is aimed at you", which you read as "not every game review is aimed at the customer"... because you're so blinkered that you think you represent every customer.

But you're not the only customer. There are millions of people who are not you and they all have different ideas about what makes a good game. And they should have reviewers that speak to their experience.

This is why we need a wide variety of voices, why we need a wide variety of opinions. One size does not fit all. There are many, many, many ways to review a video game. Yours is not the only correct way.

 

[Dizchu]

Also can we please stop talking about Zoe Quinn?

Yeah I've said plenty of stuff about the abuse and manipulation she's caused and her insane views of entitlement but... let it go.

What is anyone trying to prove? Yeah Zoe Quinn is an awful person. Her abused ex boyfriend's not exactly an angel either. But the thing is, there's no convincing anybody at this point. It's also absolutely not relevant when discussing video game topics.

If this were a forum about abuse, fine. Talk about her. But it's not. And the more she gets dragged into video game discussions the worse it is for everyone, including her.

As much as I loathe her she deserves to be cut some slack. Let's just be the better people here and let people with more experience and context in the matter deal with it. That goes for people attacking and defending her.

Let's stop caring about her.

Also let's stop caring about Anita (the person) and focus our attacks on Feminist Frequency. You want a crazy feminist? It's not Anita, It's Jonathan McIntosh.

Bringing their names up just causes more and more anger. Also ditch the "literally who" thing too.

 

[Dizchu]

Feminist Frequency have very specific views that can (and should be) ridiculed. Gamergate is filled with people with wildly varying beliefs, the only constant factor is the ethics part (which I don't even agree with but it's what they claim to believe).

But the stereotype exists for a reason.

Your own logic, no less.

The stereotype exists because people have highlighted the most extreme aspects and given them the most exposure, not because it is a valid stereotype. It's not like the stereotype was completely fabricated out of nothing.

Are you claiming that I am supporting certain stereotypes? As an ally to both Gamergate and feminism I don't see how stereotyping would help my situation.

 

[Netrigan]

You know what, I agree this is the point of absurdity.

I said, "Not every game review is aimed at you", which you read as "not every game review is aimed at the customer"... because you're so blinkered that you think you represent every customer.

But you're not the only customer. There are millions of people who are not you and they all have different ideas about what makes a good game. And they should have reviewers that speak to their experience.

This is why we need a wide variety of voices, why we need a wide variety of opinions. One size does not fit all. There are many, many, many ways to review a video game. Yours is not the only correct way.

And you're so blinkered to believe that there something should being trying to appeal to everyone as a customer.
Perfect Pasta sauce........
Not everyone will like everything. Understanding this is OK is the first step here.
The second is not blaming the product for you not enjoying it unless there is some very obvious reason you should.

And Absurdity has a sub-basement.

Not sure what ass you pulled "Perfect Pasta sauce" out of, because it's got absolutely nothing to do with anything I'm talking about. I'm not suggesting the industry build the perfect game that appeals to everyone, but saying we need a whole bunch of voices speaking to as many types of consumers as we can, so they can make an informed choice about what games are for them.

And I'm still struggling to figure out why you're so up in arms about "blaming the game". If you don't like something, you don't like it. Call that "blaming the game" if you like, but if a reviewer can't inform customers about things he didn't enjoy about the game because it violates "Kodu's Rules For Writing Game Reviews" then what good are your rules?

By all means, follow your own rules when writing game reviews, because you clearly believe in them and there are a fair number of fans who want reviews like that... but stop pretending like it's Perfect Pasta sauce. It's just one way of writing game reviews. Other customers don't find them useful at all. They shouldn't be denied reviews they find useful because it violates the Kodu's personal preferences.

 

[bobdole1979]

Also can we please stop talking about Zoe Quinn?

Yeah I've said plenty of stuff about the abuse and manipulation she's caused and her insane views of entitlement but... let it go.

What is anyone trying to prove? Yeah Zoe Quinn is an awful person. Her abused ex boyfriend's not exactly an angel either. But the thing is, there's no convincing anybody at this point. It's also absolutely not relevant when discussing video game topics.

If this were a forum about abuse, fine. Talk about her. But it's not. And the more she gets dragged into video game discussions the worse it is for everyone, including her.

As much as I loathe her she deserves to be cut some slack. Let's just be the better people here and let people with more experience and context in the matter deal with it. That goes for people attacking and defending her.

Let's stop caring about her.

Also let's stop caring about Anita (the person) and focus our attacks on Feminist Frequency. You want a crazy feminist? It's not Anita, It's Jonathan McIntosh.

Bringing their names up just causes more and more anger. Also ditch the "literally who" thing too.

well the whole thing of Gamergate started with Zoe Quinn, supposedly its all about ethics in journalisim.