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

[Ticklefist]

GamerGate is something you become involved with when you have a tenuous grasp on what's important in life.

 

[Slayer4472]

Yeah, predictable. Minimize it. Act like when one side does it it's the end of the world and proof that an entire group of people are worthy of condemnation, but when the side you agree with does it it's not big deal and the people deserve it. You prove yourself to be a hypocrite. Next time, keep it to yourself.

Odd, I've been saying that a small, loud, toxic minority who pretend to be the ur-gamer is the problem. The fact that those asshats started a massive whining session when forums kicked them out for being horrible has expanded into this whole "journalistic integrity" thing is odd to me. Seems seeing one group of "gamers" getting called on their shit doesn't mean "all gamers" are getting attacked. I've been a gamer for 20 years and nothing in those "Gamers are Dead" articles were an attack on me or any of the gamers I know.

Because the gamers I know aren't asshats.

For that matter, I wasn't claiming it was "the end of the world", I'm saying that the articles GG is having a whine fest over didn't happen in a vacuum. Loud "gamers" being toxic little shits has been a problem for a long time now, and this sort of thing happens whenever anybody dares call them on their shit.

I'll second this. I looked at those articles, and while I felt some of them were a bit over the top, not once did I feel any of that was directed at me.

I apologize, but I disagree. I also read the articles in question, and I felt that they were targeted at me; that's why I'm part of GamerGate.

 

[Jux]

I apologize, but I disagree. I also read the articles in question, and I felt that they were targeted at me; that's why I'm part of GamerGate.

What specifically about the article(s) made you feel you were a target? (no need to apologize for having a different opinion, it's not like you've tried smearing me because I don't agree with you)

 

[Jux]

-snip-

You seem to be confusing 'criticism of a business decision' with 'hate campaign'. Where are the quotes where I belittled minorities? Where is the source that journalists 'set their fans' on people, or a quote on where I defended such a thing?

 

[Slayer4472]

I apologize, but I disagree. I also read the articles in question, and I felt that they were targeted at me; that's why I'm part of GamerGate.

What specifically about the article(s) made you feel you were a target? (no need to apologize for having a different opinion, it's not like you've tried smearing me because I don't agree with you)

The use of the adjective Gamer, in all honesty. If Leigh Alexander had said "harassers need to fuck off" then I'd have gone about my day. But she described me as a "obtuse shitslinger" and a "wailing hyperconsumer", and I don't particularly appreciate that. Speaking as someone who has to deal with shit like this:

http://www.gty.org/resources/Articles/A170/Gods-Plan-for-the-Gay-Agenda

I don't want my... well, I don't like the term 'safe space'... my area of equality and meritocracy to be invaded by nutters.

 

[Plunkies]

Yeah, predictable. Minimize it. Act like when one side does it it's the end of the world and proof that an entire group of people are worthy of condemnation, but when the side you agree with does it it's not big deal and the people deserve it. You prove yourself to be a hypocrite. Next time, keep it to yourself.

Odd, I've been saying that a small, loud, toxic minority who pretend to be the ur-gamer is the problem. The fact that those asshats started a massive whining session when forums kicked them out for being horrible has expanded into this whole "journalistic integrity" thing is odd to me. Seems seeing one group of "gamers" getting called on their shit doesn't mean "all gamers" are getting attacked. I've been a gamer for 20 years and nothing in those "Gamers are Dead" articles were an attack on me or any of the gamers I know.

Because the gamers I know aren't asshats.

For that matter, I wasn't claiming it was "the end of the world", I'm saying that the articles GG is having a whine fest over didn't happen in a vacuum. Loud "gamers" being toxic little shits has been a problem for a long time now, and this sort of thing happens whenever anybody dares call them on their shit.

You can't even get your own story straight. On the one hand you say it's a small minority and then praise the articles that say "Gamers are Dead." Strange, they didn't say "A Small Minority of Vocal Gamers are Dead," did they? A coordinated attack on all gamers by a series of media outlets was necessary to call out a small vocal minority? How is that even a single news story, let alone worthy of a massive coordinated smear campaign?

This is what you do. You act like the transgressions on your side are justified and the targets of those actions deserve it, but when it's reversed they're all toxic and need to be put in their place. As I said before, hypocrite. But do keep trying to excuse the awful behavior of your side, I can at least appreciate the mental gymnastics required.

 

[Verlander]

I'm just happy that many misogynists (and sometimes even racists) all over the internet are choosing to identify themselves with a Vivian James avatar, making it easy to spot and avoid conversation with them.

 

[Slayer4472]

I'm just happy that many misogynists (and sometimes even racists) all over the internet are choosing to identify themselves with a Vivian James avatar, making it easy to spot and avoid conversation with them.

I'm just glad that I joined the Escapist during GamerGate, so I know which users support elitists, racists, and hypocrites.

 

[Jux]

-snip-

At what point are you going to apologize for libeling me? Because despite your numerous opportunities to provide quotes where I have belittled minorities, or sources that journalists set their fans on people, or quotes that I defended such a thing, you have yet to do so.

 

[dragoongfa]

After some needed sleep I am back in business

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.

The problem is that the above reason was shoddy at best, I am not a regular channer, just popped in there whenever I was bored in order to bathe in the idiocy, since you know, 4chan.

However the posts about GamerGate in /v/ were 99,9% of the time either shitposting (4chan is 4chan) or honest discussion/outrage about GG stuff, the calls for raids and harassment were the fringe minority and were always shouted down and reported by the regular GG supporters. It was later emerged that the said calls for raid and harassment were always done by Goons from SomethingAwful who just wanted to troll everyone.

Yes Moot has the right to moderate his boards as he saw fit but he banned the discussion outright for things that 4channers denounced and reported anyway.

Then there is the fact that the banning started after Moot participated in the xoxoFest where AS and a lot of Anti-GG people were the primary speakers.

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.

I am going to have to disagree with you here, it is censorship because discussion of a topic is not against the rules of any public forum that respects itself. If certain posters break the forum rules they should be banned, no question about that but why is the entire discussion banned and why would the posters who voice Pro-GG opinion be banned from a Gaming forum?

Now I was never a part of NeoGAF but some of GG supporters at the Reddit and elsewhere have been posting screen grabs about their bans:

http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2ij1g0/neogaf_user_criticizes_the_site_for_their/
http://i.imgur.com/9bybhJU.png

Then there are these little gems:

http://gamergate.giz.moe/2014/09/twitterneogaf-neogaf-deletes-fine-young-capitalists-account-time-gets-funding/
http://gamergate.giz.moe/2014/09/twitter-neogafs-worst-posts-quits-after-gamergate-pushes-neogafs-staff-off-the-edge/

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.

We agree then that it was a call for censorship. Greg pretty much said this: He disagrees with the discussion but he will not put a stop to it just because of that. He later said that the discussion raised some good points and that it was within the forum rules and saw no reason to stop it.

Yet Ben Kuchera and co still tried to make him stop it.

The way I see it, it was a call for censorship.

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.

That was not the first anti-GG article, Zoe Quinn wrote an article and when people tried to counter the argument there was a massive delete spree and defacing of posts at the cracked forum. Then the mods started publicly laughing at the people who complained about it on Facebook and elsewhere.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.860762-GamerGate-Discussion-Debate-and-Resources?page=35
http://www.funnyjunk.com/Gamergate+mods+of+crackedcom/funny-pictures/5296583/

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.

Thunderf00t wasn't banned for any legitimate reason as far as I know, there was a mass reporting of his account by a lot of people and Twitter took it down as a result. The funny thing is that he was working the days that it happened (nuclear engineering stuff) and when he returned was outraged.

His video response:

http://gamergate.giz.moe/2014/09/youtubetwitter-thunderf00t-suspended-from-twitter-sarkeesian-strike-back-gamergate/

Thunderf00t's videos and tweets were criticism of AS's Tropes vs Women videos, I am not sure if some of his language was inflammatory in his tweets (I am a Twitter noob and not a follower) but from what I have seen of him he tries to stay clear of stuff that would ban him.

Twitter later reinstated his account as well, meaning that the reports they received didn't have any basis.

 

[Jux]

The use of the adjective Gamer, in all honesty. If Leigh Alexander had said "harassers need to fuck off" then I'd have gone about my day. But she described me as a "obtuse shitslinger" and a "wailing hyperconsumer", and I don't particularly appreciate that.

I personally understood it to refer to a particular subset of gamers, but if you don't see the distinction, then there's nothing more I can really say on the subject other than we interpret that very differently.

Speaking as someone who has to deal with shit like this:

http://www.gty.org/resources/Articles/A170/Gods-Plan-for-the-Gay-Agenda

I don't want my... well, I don't like the term 'safe space'... my area of equality and meritocracy to be invaded by nutters.

I'm not quite sure going on a tirade against what one perceives to be toxic gamers (imo a subset, in you opinion the whole) is comparable to the condemnation homosexuality, the latter of which I find unequivocally abhorrent.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

The use of the adjective Gamer, in all honesty. If Leigh Alexander had said "harassers need to fuck off" then I'd have gone about my day. But she described me as a "obtuse shitslinger" and a "wailing hyperconsumer", and I don't particularly appreciate that.

I personally understood it to refer to a particular subset of gamers, but if you don't see the distinction, then there's nothing more I can really say on the subject other than we interpret that very differently.

Speaking as someone who has to deal with shit like this:

http://www.gty.org/resources/Articles/A170/Gods-Plan-for-the-Gay-Agenda

I don't want my... well, I don't like the term 'safe space'... my area of equality and meritocracy to be invaded by nutters.

I'm not quite sure going on a tirade against what one perceives to be toxic gamers (imo a subset, in you opinion the whole) is comparable to the condemnation homosexuality, the latter of which I find unequivocally abhorrent.

I took it to be directed at those harassing as well considering how large a problem this is in gaming. I would only feel that was directed at me if I were guilty of participating in it. I am not seeing gamergate spokepersons and supporters coming out agreeing that women and girls need to have more input in gaming, in fact I am overwhelmingly seeing the opposite happen. It is hard to separate the promoting of sexism against women in gaming when they are actively repeatedly promoting exactly that.

 

[Slayer4472]

The use of the adjective Gamer, in all honesty. If Leigh Alexander had said "harassers need to fuck off" then I'd have gone about my day. But she described me as a "obtuse shitslinger" and a "wailing hyperconsumer", and I don't particularly appreciate that.

I personally understood it to refer to a particular subset of gamers, but if you don't see the distinction, then there's nothing more I can really say on the subject other than we interpret that very differently.

Speaking as someone who has to deal with shit like this:

http://www.gty.org/resources/Articles/A170/Gods-Plan-for-the-Gay-Agenda

I don't want my... well, I don't like the term 'safe space'... my area of equality and meritocracy to be invaded by nutters.

I'm not quite sure going on a tirade against what one perceives to be toxic gamers (imo a subset, in you opinion the whole) is comparable to the condemnation homosexuality, the latter of which I find unequivocally abhorrent.

It's not meant to be an equivocation so much as a pointing out of similarity. In these two scenarios, I see two people (Alexander/ Macarthur) attacking me based on my identifying adjectives. It's not the same level on wrongness, but it is still a betrayal.

 

[Jux]

It's not meant to be an equivocation so much as a pointing out of similarity. In these two scenarios, I see two people (Alexander/ Macarthur) attacking me based on my identifying adjectives. It's not the same level on wrongness, but it is still a betrayal.

I think I understand what you're trying to say, but I feel that someone condemning someone for their sexuality, which for most people isn't a choice (I'll stop short of saying all simply because I've seen people claim they choose to be gay), something they have no control over, versus condemning people (though not to eternal damnation) on the perceived attitude of toxic behavior, which as far as I can tell is always a choice, is apples and oranges.

Now, I just got home, and it's almost 5 am, so I'll be going to bed. Have a good one.

 

[Bat Vader]

I think it should also be stated that people shouldn't be afraid to remain neutral or uncaring and apathetic towards it either. I fall into the latter category. I give it another couple of months before all of this is just swept away.

 

[Slayer4472]

It's not meant to be an equivocation so much as a pointing out of similarity. In these two scenarios, I see two people (Alexander/ Macarthur) attacking me based on my identifying adjectives. It's not the same level on wrongness, but it is still a betrayal.

I think I understand what you're trying to say, but I feel that someone condemning someone for their sexuality, which for most people isn't a choice (I'll stop short of saying all simply because I've seen people claim they choose to be gay), something they have no control over, versus condemning people (though not to eternal damnation) on the perceived attitude of toxic behavior, which as far as I can tell is always a choice, is apples and oranges.

Now, I just got home, and it's almost 5 am, so I'll be going to bed. Have a good one.

Hey, you too. It's always good to engage with those you disagree with =)

Spoiler

The use of the adjective Gamer, in all honesty. If Leigh Alexander had said "harassers need to fuck off" then I'd have gone about my day. But she described me as a "obtuse shitslinger" and a "wailing hyperconsumer", and I don't particularly appreciate that.

I personally understood it to refer to a particular subset of gamers, but if you don't see the distinction, then there's nothing more I can really say on the subject other than we interpret that very differently.

Speaking as someone who has to deal with shit like this:

http://www.gty.org/resources/Articles/A170/Gods-Plan-for-the-Gay-Agenda

I don't want my... well, I don't like the term 'safe space'... my area of equality and meritocracy to be invaded by nutters.

I'm not quite sure going on a tirade against what one perceives to be toxic gamers (imo a subset, in you opinion the whole) is comparable to the condemnation homosexuality, the latter of which I find unequivocally oi.

I took it to be directed at those harassing as well considering how large a problem this is in gaming. I would only feel that was directed at me if I were guilty of participating in it. I am not seeing gamergate spokepersons and supporters coming out agreeing that women and girls need to have more input in gaming, in fact I am overwhelmingly seeing the opposite happen. It is hard to separate the promoting of sexism against women in gaming when they are actively repeatedly promoting exactly that.

Well, let me be the first:

I believe that ALL adjectives should have an equally important voice, whether it be men/women, straight/gay, white/black/asian/latin, etc. I believe that is the majority view in GamerGate, as most of us are liberals.

That being said, I do feel that the "Gamers Are Dead" articles were aimed at me, and I am angry about it.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I think it should also be stated that people shouldn't be afraid to be remain neutral or uncaring and apathetic towards it either. I fall into the latter category. I give it another couple of months before all of this is just swept away.

I do hope so, however, I am afraid it will fizzle out after a long drawn out death.. There will be the same couple of people trying to keep it going on and on.. until finally they get ignored long enough and go away entertained by their next big ado.

 

[Bat Vader]

I think it should also be stated that people shouldn't be afraid to be remain neutral or uncaring and apathetic towards it either. I fall into the latter category. I give it another couple of months before all of this is just swept away.

I do hope so, however, I am afraid it will fizzle out after a long drawn out death.. There will be the same couple of people trying to keep it going on and on.. until finally they get ignored long enough and go away entertained by their next big ado.

Most likely but that is how most big things like this tend to die. It's basically like the ME 3 ending. People will scream and shout, get bored, and then go home.