You don't have to be afraid of taking a public stance against #GamerGate.

Jux

Hmm
Sep 2, 2012
868
4
23
Ultratwinkie said:
No you said you stopped following everything regarding the controversy because research was too time consuming for you, but that never stopped you from talking about it.
So because I don't actively follow whatever ya'll are on about at this very moment, everything I was informed about up until that point is null and void? Did ya'll make a time machine and reinvent how all this happened? Is what I knew prior no longer actually events that took place?


If you don't care, you don't talk about it and go about your day. Not run around spouting copy pasted spin from the gamergate twitter feed. Which people would only know by looking at twitter.
I don't care about whatever gg is breathlessly reporting about at whatever moment of the day, that doesn't mean I don't care about letting ya'll rewrite history however you please. And I don't follow twitter. I occasionally see what gets posted there when it's linked to me. So thanks, but I'm not going to tell you what to talk about, so kindaly extend me the same courtesy.


and its hilarious how you say its "docdump" instead of sourcing claims because it gets too long. By your own words. I should hire kotaku to condense it into a single sentence analogy using Master Chief and Rainbow Dash, that would be so much more reputable right?
The last few conversations we had, every time you 'sourced a claim', it was a laundry list of stuff, most of which had nothing to do with what I was asking for. So yea, that is pretty much the definition of docdumping.


and you condemn harassment? Okay then, then why did you defend the journalists who set their fans on these people or tumblr who is the source of a lot of doxxing and threats?
[citation needed] on all of it. First that journalists 'set their fans' on anyone, second that I actually defended such a thing.

Saying it didn't exist and wasn't a rampant problem? You were more than happy to side step the hate coming from these two sources yet gamergaters get multiple death threats every day.

Every time you try to correct someone, its always about gamergate and how its awful. You never corrected anyone saying anti GG is about diversity when one of the main figureheads against gamergate is a white supremacist who claims he is THE diversity in anti GG.

so don't tell me you go after both when its obvious you only go after one.
I frankly don't care if you go after harassment or not. What I care about is that if gg is about journalistic ethics, that's what they stick to.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,153
5,860
118
Country
United Kingdom
dragoongfa said:
I have to go to sleep (3:00AM here) so I will make it quick:

The biggest is that 4chan banned discussion about GamerGate almost a month ago (Think about it: 4chan banned a topic).
Remember, this wasn't ideological, it wasn't censorship from the anti-gamergate side. Apparently, it was because they violated the rules pertaining to personal information and raids [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bx0VQwBCUAE809U.png:large]. We should all recognise the right of a site's own owner to moderate it; almost every site has rules.

dragoongfa said:
Every pro-GG member of NeoGAF was banned early in the controversy.
I couldn't find anything conclusive on this. Do you have any links? I found people who had been banned and claimed this was the reason, but that's far from compelling.

If true, it's a pretty shoddy way to run a discussion board, but it's still an example of a site moderating its own content; it's not really censorship.

dragoongfa said:
At the GameJournoPro leak Ben Kuchera of Polygon tried to convince Greg Tito of the Escapist to ban all discussion from the Escapist. After the emails were leaked there was the DDOS attack against the Escapist as well.
When Cracked went Anti-GG all of the pro-gg comments were deleted or defaced by the mods.

Those are from the top of my head, I am sure that more examples are around and if you need proof some Pro-GG people here will be happy to offer it.

I am going to sleep, have a goon day/afternoon/night everyone.
I'm extremely glad Greg and the Escapist ignored that call, then. It's a legitimate discussion, and ignoring it won't make it go away.

A quick hunt for a Gamergate-related Cracked article [http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-ways-gamergate-debate-has-made-world-worse/] shows that comments disagreeing (vocally and even aggressively) with the article still stand.

Nirallus said:
Co-opting the moderators on Reddit and 4chan to ban all discussion of the topic. Taking down MundaneMatt's video with a bogus DMCA complaint. Getting Thunderfoot banned from Twitter for criticizing Anita Sarkeesian's videos. Trying to browbeat Greg Tito into locking GamerGate threads right here on the escapist.

Edit: Plus the other examples in the post above mine.
I addressed most of this stuff above. With regards to Thunderf00t, I can't find what tweet(s) he was actually banned for. If you know where I can, I'd appreciate a link.

I'd like to evaluate whether it was actually just legitimate criticism, or whether Twitter's stated grounds have any basis.
 

Mikeybb

Nunc est Durandum
Aug 19, 2014
862
0
0
Not The Bees said:
Hi Mikey,

By the way, when I spoke of people I find genuinely pleasant to talk to, you are counted amongst those people. At any rate, you'd be surprised how incredibly easy it is to find bleeding into other topics, even when said topic isn't about gamergate. Sure, you'd think Feminism it'd pop up, but I saw one the other day (and I swear I wish I could remember what it was about) where it erupted between two people. And then the entire thread eventually devolved into it.
That's really nice to hear.
The first bit I mean.
All the rest is disheartening.

Anyway, first off I'm going to apologize for slicing up your post to respond to.
I'm not overly fond of it as a method of response.
It always looks a little confrontational.
Only doing it here to help keep my migraine addled brain on track.

I'm disappointed to learn it's spreading to places it shouldn't
If I spot it, I try to nudge it back to the coral, but I can't be here all the time.
I know for some it's the topic that fires everything they want to talk about, but there needs to be some consideration in that regard.

It regularly gets pushed into the R&P section, but because they don't really want to talk about it there, it usually gets ignored (thankfully). But even things that are just supposed to be about stupid topics can eventually set into a fight amongst people about gamergate, because someone has brought up feminism, or journalism, or harassment, or something. One of those filthy buzzwords that get thrown around.
That's even more disappointing.
What I said above stands.
We have a place for that to be discussed and other specific threads for it too.
I know tempers can fray and spill overs can happen, but that needs to be dealt with as in a place like R&P, it's blatant derailing.

The GameDev articles, both female and male articles, were really interesting, but the female one just exploded into a toxic thread almost immediately. Granted, that one was actually about gamergate, but it wasn't supposed to be about journalism, it was supposed to be about developers and how they've been dealing with it. About how they saw it. But somehow it became whether or not Escapist had written a bad article, if these women were fake, if they made everything up to get attention... And that's just not very welcoming.
Instead of seeing it as a way to see how developers were handling the gamergate situation it turned back into just a fight about Zoe and Anita (a bunch of it was), and Jim and SJWs, so even the Gamergate threads that aren't about the same old gamergate issues end up getting hijacked so you can't feel welcomed to talk about new things.
To you and me both.
I only stepped into those threads to say 'thankyou for posting them' and give an immediate feedback.
Didn't stay around long enough to witness any of that, but sadly it's not hard to imagine it happening.

Hijacking needs to be curtailed.


I think that's what I mean by not feeling welcomed. I have no issue about bleeding into other threads, but when it turns so angry so quickly, then what's the point of going into a thread in the first place? Why not just turn on Rush Limbaugh or Bill Mahr and have them tell me I'm wrong for whatever I'm believing in for the next hour?
You know, it's odd.
This was something I posted about last night.
I don't know if it was read or not.
...but anyway.

I'm starting to think that this is happening because of a general lack of engagement from the people that these individual posters are angry toward.
As a result, when they do find a contrary opinion on the matter, the words (and the emotions wrapped up with them) that they wish they could be heard by some, are instead heard by someone who doesn't deserve that kind of impassioned response.

Now, I know and you know this is not an excuse for doing it, just my take on the 'why' it's happening.

I expressed in the GG thread that the more it happens, the more we treat the people who will listen like they're manifestations of the people who we're angry at for refusing to listen, the more we're going to drive them away.
In the end, there'll be no one left who wants to listen at all.

Suffice to say, I hope some people read it and internalized it.

As for the people that sent me the messages, I just delete them. I'm not one to send anything to mods, I've explained why before, back on the Zoe thread, which you probably missed, but it comes down to a long history of stuff that is entirely too complicated to explain here and derails the conversation a bit. If it were anything more than sarcastic or mean, then I would do so, but they're mostly just not happy people, and for that I just close my eyes and take a breath and delete. Much easier that way to me.
I did miss the original, and I won't ask you to derail or drag up something unpleasant.
Also, I'll ask for forbearance on this exchange as I think we are derailing a little bit here, but anyway...

That's a decision I'm going to respect, even if I don't agree.
You have to deal with that kind of harassment in the way that makes you most comfortable and no one has a right to ask you to deal with it in any other way.

I will ask that if anyone else who reads this has received nasty private messages though, please report that behavior to a moderator.
The people who are doing that to you are likely doing it to other people as well.
it shouldn't be allowed to go on.

Anyway.
I hope that there's something that can be done to tone down that feeling the thread and other overspills have been giving lately.
You are a liked poster and would be missed by a lot of people here.
I'm at a loss to think what that could be right now, but suffice to say, It's something I'm going to be ruminating on.
 

Jux

Hmm
Sep 2, 2012
868
4
23
Ultratwinkie said:
Rewriting history? What?
Primarily, the stone headed insistence that gg didn't spawn from harassment of quinn that I see so much from gg supporters.

It doesn't matter how it starts, it matters how it ends.
Ah yes, 'the ends justify the means'. Words spoken by every man of integrity.

Civil rights started as violent backlash against whites in the 1800s all the way into the 1900s. No one is saying the NAACP condones genocide of whites.
Climb off that cross man, ya'll aren't fighting for civil rights.

Labor unions were once illegal and called communist spies. No one is saying labor unions are communist now.
Yea, I'd disagree with that. [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2010/12/09/afl-cio-leader-gladly-accepts-communist-party-award/] That aside though, who cares if troglodytes call labor unions communist? I don't have anything particularly against communists. If anything, hard core communists are just wild eyed idealists to me, much like libertarians, but less destructive than the Randroids.

and you did defend journalists by saying harassment from their side was nonexistent and one off events. Now you're saying harassment doesn't matter and all you care about is "making sure gamer gate sticks to its message."

Just as I thought. Thanks for admitting it.
So, you're not going to provide citation that journalists 'set their fans on' anyone, or that I defended it. Ok, good to know.
 

Ushiromiya Battler

Oddly satisfied
Feb 7, 2010
601
0
0
Silvanus said:
Remember, this wasn't ideological, it wasn't censorship from the anti-gamergate side. Apparently, it was because they violated the rules pertaining to personal information and raids [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bx0VQwBCUAE809U.png:large]. We should all recognise the right of a site's own owner to moderate it; almost every site has rules.
I only have issue with this. The rule might be there, but it was never enforced before this point. Unless it was a specific instance where the owner had been contacted by authorities.
That one rule is literally broken everyday on the site.
EDIT: I noticed you linked a post related to /v/, which I'll agree was correct.
I've only taken issue at the banning and censoring on the /b/(random) board.


OT: I've mostly noticed that as long as you don't pick a side and don't actively post in threads saying how much you don't care or tell one side they're wrong you don't get harassed by either side.
I care enough about it that I'll occasionally make a post on it, but I don't go around and claim I don't care while actively bashing either side. Which a lot of people do.
Still, most people I've spoken to about it has been fairly nice.
 

Doom-Slayer

Ooooh...I has custom title.
Jul 18, 2009
630
0
0
Personally, I'm not so much as afraid as not interested in participating. I don't participate in any discussions about Anita Sarkeesian stuff, and Im not about to start with this. I have an opinion on it obviously, but the way this issue has been blown out of proportion by everybody, me responding would be like throwing a glass of water onto a forest fire.
 

Aurion

New member
Dec 21, 2012
79
0
0
broadcaststatic said:
Or, alternately, people who view your channel and yet are either sympathetic to or flag-waving GG partisans aren't actually literally Hitlerspawn.

Radical thought, that. One of the most routinely amusing parts of a political debate is how flag-wavers on both ends tend to assume everyone who disagrees with them is some sort of Stalin/Hitler Commienazi murderbaby.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,153
5,860
118
Country
United Kingdom
Houseman said:
I think it was way too heavy-handed for the claim that "it's against the rules!" to fly.

Just because one or two users break the rules and doxx someone, it shouldn't mean that "NO DISCUSSION OF THIS TOPIC IS EVER ALLOWED ANYWHERE ON THE SITE FOR ALL TIME!"

Assuming that all discussion of GG is permabanned, of course. I don't know if this is actually the case.


And even saying "All discussion about X topic is permabanned because someone might catch wind of it and repost the rule-breaking content" is a slippery slope.
Well, you have to remember how 4chan do things. They once replaced every word people posted with the word "Puddi". They care little for nuance.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Too many twats on both sides for me to give a shit. Frankly GamerGate just feels like noise. Just like with the whole Anita debate. Everyone shouting, nothing getting accomplished. To quote Macbeth "It is a tale, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Houseman said:
erttheking said:
Too many twats on both sides for me to give a shit. Frankly GamerGate just feels like noise. Just like with the whole Anita debate. Everyone shouting, nothing getting accomplished. To quote Macbeth "It is a tale, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
Have you seen all those graphs of traffic to certain cites plummeting and letters from advertising sponsors pulling out?
Yeah. I've also heard people saying that the traffic is already flowing back. And even if it wasn't I haven't heard anything about websites making changes to get those people back.

And like I said. I don't care.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Nirallus said:
Their modus operandi is not just to condemn but censor, so they expect to see that on our side. Which won't happen.
That's why Gamergate was doing snoopy dances over getting folks fired, because they would never censor someone. Except there.
 

BloatedGuppy

New member
Feb 3, 2010
9,572
0
0
erttheking said:
Yeah. I've also heard people saying that the traffic is already flowing back. And even if it wasn't I haven't heard anything about websites making changes to get those people back.

And like I said. I don't care.
It's down on some sites, up on other sites. Kotaku and Polygon almost seem to be profiting, if anything. RPS is showing the same dip they did last year at this time. PC Gamers apparently hate October.

Gamasutra was WAY down but has surged recently.

In all honesty I wouldn't have been surprised if numbers DID dip I just haven't seen much evidence to support it.