So would you agree that GG is not about slut-shaming for the same reason the civil rights movement is not about a poor old woman not being able to get a bus seat?Revnak said:
well, the the escapist was just attacked.
- Thread starter Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, I am on The Escapist.Zachary Amaranth said:You deserve an award for your uncompromising devotion to journalistic integrity.shrekfan246 said:Al Gore is too important for that.
He just hired Nixon to do it for him.
My evidence?
Indisputable.
As we all know, only the best, most hard-hitting and critical of journalistic investigation happens here.
And my evidence for that is the thread I made the other day about Final Fantasy XIII getting a PC release. In which I totally didn't admit that I really really really don't like that game.
...
I can source myself in these circumstances, right?
it has baring in a conversation about the definition of a word, especially since you brought up how assault has levels and I pointed out that not only are there specific terms for various levels, but also that "misogyny" has no quantifiers at the moment, just a blanket statement.Zachary Amaranth said:
I asked you to use the word that would describe all examples (misogyny) and then show me how one would use it tactfully so as to get the point across for each idea (a threat, an insult, etc).Zachary Amaranth said:
Basically I asked you to use the word in such a way that it didn't seem like just a blanket label meant to insult and defame the one labeled it. Care to try again?
It was the only thing I could see as rational as to why anyone would take a specific word and bastardize it like you do, well, outside of cheap rhetorical tricks and underhanded shaming of people but I didn't think that was why you wanted to use in the same way a lot of journalists are being criticized for now.Zachary Amaranth said:
But please, save me the effort of having to guess then. Why do you use the word that means a specific outlook to a group of people and instead try to shoehorn it into meaning any negative view or interaction towards a member of that group?
It doesn't matter what 'side' did this. The person or group that did it is an asshole. That's about all we should surmise out of this.
Just keep it cool. You were being silenced, but that doesn't mean the 'sjw brigade' or whatever was clearly behind it. Again, makes the tin foil hat that much more noticeable.
As it is now I'm wearing about a quarter of a tin foil hat. Nice fashion accessory.
Just keep it cool. You were being silenced, but that doesn't mean the 'sjw brigade' or whatever was clearly behind it. Again, makes the tin foil hat that much more noticeable.
As it is now I'm wearing about a quarter of a tin foil hat. Nice fashion accessory.
Don't you think this is a *little bit* of an over-reaction? Even a little? This isn't really that serious of an issue, the DDOS attack will be over and then this whole topic will blow over, and we'll all go back to how things were previously. This isn't a dramatic stand-off in Braveheart, it's a bunch of people on the internet shouting at each other about how the other side is so dumb and they should just stop being so dumb cause if they disagree with them they must be dumb or terrible people, right? Both sides are making massive straw men of their opponents and acting as if the vocal minority is all that represents the opposing group. This entire conflict is pointless and stupid, and acting as if it's some sort of crisis of free-speech is pointless, it's not. Nobody involved in this cares about your free speech or about mine for that matter, so the best way to deal with this is to ignore it and wait for it to blow over, which it will.Witty Name Here said:
This "Anti-GG" side has no power, the pro-GG side has no power, they have each have their own little corners of the internet to talk about how the imagined oppressors of the opposing viewpoint are so awful and disgusting but they can't honestly make anything worse or better for the opposite end of the spectrum. Might as well put a disclaimer down here: I don't give a shit one way or another which side is right, or better, or anything like that, I long since checked out of this, but seeing people flail around, grand-standing and acting as if they're about to storm the gates of mordor irked me. So I felt I had to say something.
So is that like a doo rag then? or is it just sort of safety-pinned to the side a bit there like an upperclass women from victorian london or something?Solaire of Astora said:
That is just stupid. No one things Kuchera did it.irishda said:
Now the heavy handed attempts to censor the entire discussion at large mixed with the very polarizing nature of the topic and a growing escalation of response against gamergate, including personal doxxing, personal phone call threats, the loss of a job, hacking of a pro-gamergate game jam project and even other sites being shut down or hacked, well, you can at least see this is a predictable possibility at the very least because of the volatile nature of this particular clash in the community. Why you would dismiss it so though, well, you got me stumped.
Except you were readily able to differentiate levels yourself, even without set quantifiers. Language is truly a wonderful thing, and you've mastered it so thoroughly you're capable of providing examples even as you say there are none.runic knight said:
Anyway, whether you like the definition still doesn't change my point, that it exists and is used as such, and that to insist that someone clearly meant another, more strict and unlikely definition is absurd and unreasonable.
And since the rest of this is going in circles, I'm just going to point out that that was my only reason for offering up the definition you're now trying to dissect and move on. That it exists is all I need, and I won't endorse or defend it.
Ya know, I can't help but wonder if this all happened just because they could given that this is the only place that let this whole GG discussion happen.
Seeing all the finger pointing and the outlandish accusations being thrown all willy-nilly, I can't help but wonder if that was the intended reaction. I mean, this is obviously a hot-button issue, my own personal opinions on this aside, and so, why not?
No one has taken credit for it, so it's probably just some script kiddy thinking that this would be hilarious and just did it. And the reaction? A bunch of people getting their panties in a twist about who might have done it. So, mission accomplished...?
I dunno. At this point I find this whole thing beyond reason and beyond the realms of ridiculousness. I'd laugh at it all, but, ya know, I have internal organs to think about here.
Seeing all the finger pointing and the outlandish accusations being thrown all willy-nilly, I can't help but wonder if that was the intended reaction. I mean, this is obviously a hot-button issue, my own personal opinions on this aside, and so, why not?
No one has taken credit for it, so it's probably just some script kiddy thinking that this would be hilarious and just did it. And the reaction? A bunch of people getting their panties in a twist about who might have done it. So, mission accomplished...?
I dunno. At this point I find this whole thing beyond reason and beyond the realms of ridiculousness. I'd laugh at it all, but, ya know, I have internal organs to think about here.
Except the guy who I quoted, who shortened Kuchera to "they" either because it sounds better that a bunch of people "ganged up" on Tito or because his brain interpreted a guy saying, "It looks like harassment" to "they pressured Tito into censorship."runic knight said:
But hey, you lot keep beating that "They're afraid of us! That's why they want to shut us up!" talk. Don't worry, it's not the exact same thing the Palin supporters said about her when everyone was ripping on her, and it doesn't make you guys look insane at all.
How dare you. How. dare. you. You know, I haven't been this mad in a while. You really think you can compare someone who has lost someone they care about? How can you even say that with a straight face? It is absolutely disgusting that you think you would do this. Want to know why no one treats your cult with respect? It's because of shit like this.kyp275 said:
I'm pro GG, that being said for the purposes of disclosure, I'm trying these days not to throw my opinion around on speculation. Though only people who seem to rep the anti-GG seem to be doing attacks like this at all. The Fine Young Capitalists being hacked twice and the, offed a bribe to keep qiuet, along with other doxxings are going to paint the anti GG side as the attackers initially, we'll see though....
Was this even an attack? Or could it be because tons of people are flocking to the bloated whale carcass of a 6000+ post thread at once on a weekend and it crashed the servers?
Nah, that's too simple. Instead I think we should all agree that the SJWs run the internet and decided to censor this important debate about who Zoe Quinn is currently having sex with.
Nah, that's too simple. Instead I think we should all agree that the SJWs run the internet and decided to censor this important debate about who Zoe Quinn is currently having sex with.
No, actually, I couldn't differentiate betweenZachary Amaranth said:
"That guy is a misogynist."
"That guy is a misogynist."
"That guy is a misogynist."
as to me all of that mean "that guy hates women for being women". How can you tell which one means the guy only insulted a single woman, threatened several women or hates all women?
Sort of impossible to take the label serious at all when "misogynist could mean anything from
"That guy insulted a woman he was mad at"
to
"That guy hates all women with a passion."
this is my problem with using such an all encompassing definition of the word. It makes it damn meaningless in a conversation. Well, except for the shame and blame value anyways. Very effective at defaming people disagreed with or deflecting criticisms without having to actually own up to them. As I said, the gaming news media has been doing that a lot lately.
I'm sorry you can't see the point in having definitions people share though. Sort of makes it impossible to have a conversation when you define words differently and then stamp your foot about the absurdity of gutting the definition of a word like you have being the cause of confusion and miscommunication. Sort of suggests you never really cared about discussion in the first place, you know?
You're letting people throw you off the deep end! Stay calm. I got mad too, but calling it a cult will not help anyone. Yes, what he implied to Mars was horrendous and she'll probably not respond to it, but he has his reasons. He at a time felt something similar to what she felt then. The best thing to do is inform him that hey, people like me were anti GG and we thought comparisons to terrorists went too far and ask him if he thought what Witty said was also unjustified.xaszatm said:
I do view myself as the classy type for sure.runic knight said:
But yeah, people are just saying extremely inflammatory things now. Don't lash out at people because they happen to disagree with you.
There is no proof of who did this at this time. No one here should be an "enemy." Granted, some seem to be doing their damned best to make the situation worse.
Because "they" could never just mean "anti gamergate people"? Never even said they were afraid though, just that many who see themselves as antigamergate do want us to shut up. Hell, many in this thread have expressed the same idea around these forums too. It is just whoever DDoS'd the server tried to enforce it. Oh, and it was a DDoS. I'll take the guy who runs the show here's word on that over your attempts to dismiss it as just traffic. Not only because I think he would be a bit more in the know about things, but also because the way DDoS works leaves a pretty obvious trail and at this point you'd have to be pretty obtuse or intentionally intellectually dishonest to try to it wasn't. Or perhaps you think those people flooding the thread were refreshing the pages a few thousand times a second in their haste to exclaim about how they can't believe this is still going on?irishda said:
You might wanna look up the web traffic on those websites. They've plummeted and have stayed way down for weeks now. Just because no one's been fired doesn't mean no one's in trouble.Azure23 said:
The Brietbart E-Mail leak pretty much showed that certain games journalists have colluded to help Literally Who's image rather than talk on the issue of no ethics being practiced by the websites in question. TotalBiscuit just went on a rant about how when those same E-mails came out, the Games Journalist Roundtable he had arranged fell apart when the journalists involved pulled out all at once.
So no, things aren't "chugging along fine".