Your thoughts on... Nerd/Geek culture of today.

[IceForce]

...while acknowledging the fact that someone who abused their partner while cheating on them with multiple people is a terrible person.

And that's exactly my point. If the matter truly and honestly was "dead once and for all", then it shouldn't even BE "acknowledged".

Instead of re-writing what I already wrote regarding this to Silvanus I'll just post a direct link [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.938029-Your-thoughts-on-Nerd-Geek-culture-of-today?page=7#23645981]. It's more efficient that way.

The correct response to someone bringing up a subject that is "dead once and for all" is to tell the person that the subject is dead and buried and you don't wish to talk about it.
But you didn't. You engaged in the subject once again, proving that it's not quite as "dead" as you initially indicated.

...

Also this from the previous page:

So we have 2 people vs. the virtual entirety of Blizzard's fanbase/consumer base.

Citation please. Where is your proof that the "virtual entirety" of Blizzard's consumer base was against the Tracer change? Did you poll them all?

 

[Zontar]

The correct response to someone bringing up a subject that is "dead once and for all" is to tell the person that the subject is dead and buried and you don't wish to talk about it.

Sorry but after 2 years of doing that with others it didn't really work. Wu for example only went away after her supporters got tired of her, which was about 18 months after GG actively tried to move away from talking about her.

Plus, as someone who has a history with many in my circle having been abused by their partners, if someone is trying to defend a self-admitted abuser I'm not exactly the type of person to let it fly. It's a flaw in who I am but it's something I can't seem to get rid of.

Citation please. Where is your proof that the "virtual entirety" of Blizzard's consumer base was against the Tracer change? Did you poll them all?

Let's see: there's the fact that you are now the third person on the entirety of the internet who seems to be supporting Blizzard in all this for one. Their own forums for another as there doesn't seem to be anyone giving their support to them. If there is this group out there who support Blizzard taking an anti-sex stance that would barely garner a T rating from rating boards, they've gone out of their way to make their existence not be known. Sure it's the argument of absence of evidence but I'm not going to assume something that hasn't proven itself to be real is real.

 

[IceForce]

there's the fact that you are now the third person on the entirety of the internet ...

Let me just stop you there. Generally, it's considered rather poor form to respond to a [citation needed] with an even more grandiose claim than the one that required citing.

So now we need TWO citations needed, - one for the "virtual entirety" claim you posted earlier, and another for this "third person on the entirety of the internet" claim you made right here.

I'm not going to assume something that hasn't proven itself to be real is real.

Strange, because you've made quite a few assumptions here already.

You've assumed that the "virtual entirety" of Blizzard's userbase was in opposition to the Tracer alteration, despite you fully admitting you have no real evidence to support such an assumption. You've also assumed I'm the "third person on the entirety of the internet" to believe something, when I've never indicated I believed any such thing, and once again you have no evidence to support this assumption anyways.

 

[Zontar]

Let me just stop you there. Generally, it's considered rather poor form to respond to a [citation needed] with an even more grandiose claim than the one that required citing.

So now we need TWO citations needed, - one for the "virtual entirety" claim you posted earlier, and another for this "third person on the entirety of the internet" claim you made right here.

So basically you don't have any evidence to contradict my observations?

Strange, because you've made quite a few assumptions here already.

You've assumed that the "virtual entirety" of Blizzard's userbase was in opposition to the Tracer alteration, despite you fully admitting you have no real evidence to support such an assumption. You've also assumed I'm the "third person on the entirety of the internet" to believe something, when I've never indicated I believed any such thing, and once again you have no evidence to support this assumption anyways.

So basically one can't make hyperbolic statement and every single thing we will ever say must be 100% literal and accurate, got it.

In any event, no one anywhere has demonstrated there being any level of support amongst Blizzard's user base for the removal outside of the lone individual who complained in the first place. As it stands that remains the case, meanwhile Blizzard's forums and social media outlets had been flooded by long time users complaining about it being removed. If there is any evidence that more then a handful of people support the removal, enough to constitute being large enough to statistically be a group worth noting even exists, I've not seen any evidence of such and not a single person has presented such evidence either.

I'm not going to assume a silent group exists out there that supports her pose being removed who for whatever reason don't want their existence known.

That's a strange, parallel universe peering crystal ball you have there. Back in the real world I can't track down anything on the scale of the Quinnconspiracy. Hell you even pointed out that people were outraged that multiple websites didn't care about the TMZ bullshit of some nobody maybe sleeping with people.

I don't know why you're under the illusion any of these sites are any better then TMZ when their job is literally to be the TMZ of gaming, and surprise surprise a month before the Quinspiracy started there was another such relationship that happened that was unprofessional in the extreme, but instead the gaming press elected to report on it instead of covering it up. Of course because they reported on it instead of covering it up no one gave a shit and by the end of the week everyone had forgotten it had happened.

Of course, that would have been the fate of the Zoe Post had it been reported on (since it was literally bog standard reporting material for gaming sites at the time before standards became a thing in the post-GG gaming world) or ignored it. Instead the TMZ of gaming decided "you know what, at this precise moment where it will obviously look like we are covering something up, we should not make any mention of this story and delete any conversation of it happening on our sites and also on sites that have a history of only deleting illegal material. We know it'll make us look suspect because of the obvious conflict of interest and connections we have to the implicated, but we suddenly have morals damn it". I highly doubt this was the thought process behind it. And the GameJornosPro leak proves it wasn't.

But I guess if you say it's sexist then that's the only thing you need for your argument, eh? We'll just have to take your word for it apparently.

You know, given how this exact situation actually did get reported on by the gaming media when the implicated was a man, but covered up one month later when it was a woman, I think sexist is actually a perfectly accurate word for it. Unless you're using the nonsensical definition where only men can be sexist, but only fringe radicals believe such nonsense.

Funny how the one that was about a woman maybe sleeping with people caused all the harassment though. Which, as you pointed out, is included in this "typical, monthly gaming drama".

I am enjoying seeing you backpedal from what you said though.

You know, your intentionally misinterpreting my posts doesn't actually change what I posts have said. Just because you choose to ignore what is said and respond to meaning you place upon it that does not exist doesn't actually make that meaning become what the words say.

I stated that controversy in the gaming world is a monthly thing. You took that as meaning that women being harassed for sleeping with people is the norm in the gaming world. There is no rational connection between the two, and you have done nothing to attempt to change that in your posts aside from trying to repeat the conclusion without explaining a rational for how you came to that conclusion in the first place.

Am I going to defend Blizzard from the argument "Blizzard is stupid and the majority are always right"? You honestly think that "The majority is always right" is an argument that holds any weight whatsoever?

Are you saying the minority is always right?

In any event, in the business world of a capitalist nation, which despite what you clearly believe is not in fact the same as the democratic system of governance, the customer is always right. And when the customer says "I don't like you removing 'x' form the product for no justifiable reason", the customer is right. Why do you believe the customer is wrong? Because that is the stance you are taking, that the customer is wrong.

 

[Silvanus]

Quite the contrary, as it disproves Pluvia's assumption that taking issue with a person in a committed relationship who sleeps with others is the same as taking issue with someone who sleeps with others, and that because of the later is sexist the former must also be sexist. I didn't prove your point and neither I nor anyone else proves Pluvia's.

My point is that people are still condemning a stranger's private life, over a year after the fact and beyond any possible practical argument. That was proven when you did exactly that.

It's not a private life when that stranger goes out of their way to attempt to keep it in the limelight. The reason Quinn's name keeps coming up but not Greyson's isn't because of sexism, it's because Greyson kept his head down and his mouth shut when it was happening instead of going online, making an ass of himself, becoming a propagandist, oh and violating a person's rights with an illegal and unconstitutional gag order while simultaneously cyber-stalking that same person.

If it was just the sex, only the sex and nothing but the sex then she's be as old news as Dorito's Pope, a meme most gamer's don't even understand anymore. But that wasn't what happened and instead a terrible person did terrible things on a consistent basis and the internet, being the internet, didn't forget.

More condemnation, this time about how she's comported herself afterwards. It shouldn't fucking matter. It's a private matter. Drop it.

Here's a very, very easy way to be forgotten that everyone who is against GG seems to either not be willing to accept or simply can't understand: the easier and simplest (and realistically only) way to be forgotten by the internet is to stop, let time pass and go into obscurity. That's it. That's as of yet the only way we have learned to let the internet forget us. But because a lot of those who are big names who are against GG tend to suffer narcissistic personality disorder that isn't likely to happen any time soon.

She suffered ongoing harassment. To argue this is her fault, for not shutting up when she first did, is transparent victim-blaming. There's no other word for it. It's sick.

Plenty of people understand that silence is a method of being forgotten. Perhaps some people don't agree that harassment should be forgotten, and believe it should be more widely acknowledged. Perhaps some people recognise that no matter how quiet you are, it doesn't even always work to defuse the situation anyway.

 

[Disco Biscuit]

Can you guys debate your two year old GG stuff in another thread? I was all ready to get into this on the side of "You aren't actually nerds", but here you are back to gender politics.

Are you even gamers?

 

[NewClassic_v1legacy]

Snip.

Snip.

Snip.

Snip.

[HEADING=2][/HEADING]

Hey folks, while I recognize that there's going to be a fair bit of topic drift in any given conversation as broad as this one, it feels like you've jumped ship on the geek or nerd culture discussion, and brought it down to a Zoe Quinn-GamerGate-Sexism-as-Culture thing that is tangentially related, but not quite on the mark. What Zoe Quinn did, and what's happened afterward, is only a single facet of the overall nerd and geek culture, and shouldn't make up the full depth of this thread. Pluvia in particular opened a can of worms, but at least that first post was a broader umbrella of sexism that is inherent across geek culture. It wasn't until the defense of GamerGate or the self-identified GamerGate identity thing that the thread went off the rails.

So, while I'm not opposed to this discussion happening, let's go ahead and try to bring it back toward a wider set of nerd things. Yes, we can agree that GamerGate exists and is a facet of the discussion, but so are comics, tabletop games, films, fantasy sports, and the meta-musings of the videogame industry.

Also, I want to make sure everyone in this conversation understands that criticism of certain aspects of something doesn't necessarily mean wide, umbrella criticism of that thing. Any discussion is going to be prey to mistakes, misunderstandings, and partial information. Try not to take everything personally, yeah?

[HEADING=2][/HEADING]

More on topic...

I really wish geek culture could zen out a bit sometimes. Outrage comes pretty easily among nerds, and sometimes that results in groups of people getting very aggressive in defense of their hobbies, favorites, or beliefs. Hit-back-first is weirdly common among the bullied, and among the nerdy hobbies, geeks can be terrifying bullies themselves when they hold all the power.

Are you even gamers?

Yo, not cool. Let's not say stuff like this, even ironically.

 

[Superbeast]

+EDIT++

I think this is in line with Newclassic's nudge, it's got naff-all to do with Gamergate.

Well for one perfect example there's the "white male terrorist problem in tabletop gaming" smear job that's as laughably bad as it is ludicrous.
[video snip]
That's just what I could find within links to tabs I already had open for other materials (I'm looking through the guy's videos for his 40k related material). I didn't even need to spend 20 seconds looking this up.

Now, this doesn't speak to everything in the original "white male terrorism problem" document, however one of the major accusations in the piece is indeed true (the one about setting human rights precedent).

Article:
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/taking-a-stand-against-abuse-284204591.html

Court decision:
http://www.manitobahumanrights.ca/publications/legal/garland.pdf

This is what your source labelled "she has a mental illness...she's actually crazy...As in "we the jury find the defendant" all within the opening 2 minutes of the video. Clearly said source is poorly researched - given a legal court-equivalent body explicitly did NOT find her crazy, which was part of defence against her accusations.

To head off your initial response, I am aware the same person you linked did a second follow-up video on this. I started to watch it too, to make sure I was not being uncharitable with my interpretation of his first video that you linked. It came as a complete surprise to me that, funnily enough, he disagrees with the legal findings (sarcasm).

The tagline is "Bullshit ignored is apparently bullshit legalized now!" and begins his examination with "[I would retract]...but this case is a bit different" "The kind of fucking crazy on display here" "quite a disturbing read". Also his conclusion even 5 minutes in is plain wrong - it is not the Human Rights Tribunal that sends someone to jail, that would be the Federal Court of Canada sending the sanctioned to jail for Contempt of Court for failing to comply with the Tribunal's ruling. It is also not true that it does not have to abide by ANYTHING a court otherwise does (emphasised as in the video). There is a different standard of evidence and it is a less formal setting, but it is still all done under oath, its decisions are reviewed by the Federal Court of Canada, it is chaired by a Judge, and the only places you can appeal its decisions are the Federal Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of Canada - i.e. the higher courts, and (in this case) has the same authority as a standard court. For someone being as pedantic as the gentleman in the video, it is a rather major miss-step, especially as it is what he uses to deride the entire structure of tribunals and the finding throughout the rest of the 35 minute video.

++EDIT 2++

Personally, this is why I feel there are some issues in nerd culture. Even confronted with legal documentation of a specific issue someone will pump out a 35 minute video to "disprove" a court case to save face over a prior 54.5 minute video, rather than accept that there are unsavoury characters within nerd/geek spaces and that the culture does nothing to discourage their actions.

 

[Zontar]

Personally, this is why I feel there are some issues in nerd culture. Even confronted with legal documentation of a specific issue someone will pump out a 35 minute video to "disprove" a court case to save face over a prior 54.5 minute video, rather than accept that there are unsavoury characters within nerd/geek spaces and that the culture does nothing to discourage their actions.

The problem isn't that there are unsavoury characters in within nerd/geek spaces like all others without any single exception, the problem is that many from outside those spaces paint it as being exclusively so. The point remains the initial op-ed was very much filed with what cannot reasonably be considered anything reflecting reality. Either that or the person in question doesn't seem to follow basic human behavioural patterns.

The point is many people hate nerds and geeks, and are more then willing to lie, make things up and generally not be honest about how things are to make things look bad overall instead of it being the exception to the rule.

Also, I'd like to point out the Canadian Human Rights Commission is a laughing stock here. It's an organization that has been grandfathered into remaining in effect long after its purpose has become obsolete, and 90% of the time they get a job it's something that would be humours if it wasn't for the fact it's tax payer funded and despite officially being non-partisan is anything but.

 

[Superbeast]

The problem isn't that there are unsavoury characters in within nerd/geek spaces like all others without any single exception, the problem is that many from outside those spaces paint it as being exclusively so. The point remains the initial op-ed was very much filed with what cannot reasonably be considered anything reflecting reality. Either that or the person in question doesn't seem to follow basic human behavioural patterns.

Depending on the space I think there are different types of issues - some issues can transcend all sub-nerd hobbies, but in many cases problems with the computer gaming community are different to problems with the tabletop gaming community, which in turn are different to the problems in the card game community. These days I very rarely see someone from outside either a sub-hobby or general "nerd culture" comment on anything - most often it is people from within, who are then "othered" as outsiders by certain overzealous defenders.

It is hard to take the claim that "filed with what cannot reasonably be considered anything reflecting reality" seriously in light of the fact that one of the claims was tested at virtually the highest legal level. It is reasonable to be sceptical of the other claims, they experiences only provide anecdotal evidence, but it is wrong to be dismissive of them.

The point is many people hate nerds and geeks, and are more then willing to lie, make things up and generally not be honest about how things are to make things look bad overall instead of it being the exception to the rule.

I don't think they do. It seems to be less of a cause of bullying in school these days (parter is a teacher). You won't get abuse hurled at you in the street for wearing nerd-brand clothing. I no longer feel the need to conceal my nerdy hobbies (though that might just be because I'm an adult and both I and others care less about the associated social stigma than when I was a teenager many years ago).

The fact these types of things come up again and again and again, whatever the niche, indicates that there may be some sort of prevailing issue, even if it is only held by a minority of the "community". I find that a far more likely outcome than random, repeated attempts to smear the name of "nerds" for some arbitrary reason of hatred - especially when it is coming from within rather than without.

Also, I'd like to point out the Canadian Human Rights Commission is a laughing stock here. It's an organization that has been grandfathered into remaining in effect long after its purpose has become obsolete, and 90% of the time they get a job it's something that would be humours if it wasn't for the fact it's tax payer funded and despite officially being non-partisan is anything but.

I don't think sexual harassment is ever humorous, I find the general principle that justice is taxpayer funded to be admirable rather than abhorrent, and that whether it is partisan from the government or not has any bearing on the case mentioned.

 

[Zontar]

I don't think they do. It seems to be less of a cause of bullying in school these days (parter is a teacher). You won't get abuse hurled at you in the street for wearing nerd-brand clothing. I no longer feel the need to conceal my nerdy hobbies (though that might just be because I'm an adult and both I and others care less about the associated social stigma than when I was a teenager many years ago).

That doesn't change the fact that nerds and geeks, actual nerds and geeks and not people who are jumping on the nerd culture bandwagon like Wil Wheaton or Felicia Day, do have a serious problem. The media still loves portraying nerds and geeks as at best children who never grew up, and you have professionals within the news industry openly calling for bullying against nerds and geeks to put us back in our place.

Nerd culture going mainstream was something quite a few people wanted to see be made separate from nerds.

I don't think sexual harassment is ever humorous, I find the general principle that justice is taxpayer funded to be admirable rather than abhorrent, and that whether it is partisan from the government or not has any bearing on the case mentioned.

The problem is that isn't at all what the Human Right Commission does. They actually almost never even touch on sexual harassment (that almost always goes straight to the courts with no middle man). What they do most of the time is bring people in for saying something that someone (who almost always is missing exactly 33 bones) took offence to. The Canadian Human Rights Commission isn't about upholding the law, it's about trying to police society outside the framework of the constitution. Or at least that is what it has become. Which is why it has a downright abysmal rate of courts throwing out their rulings due to violating the constitution or the bill of rights.

I don't know how things are in the UK, but in Canada our HRC is only respected by two groups: themselves and the Federal Liberal Party. That's about it.

 

[GestaltEsper]

So...has geek/nerd culture ever done something positive/worth taking pride in? I'm starting to wonder why so many take up the label if no one has anything good to say about it.

 

[Zontar]

So...has geek/nerd culture ever done something positive/worth taking pride in?

Has any group that isn't doing what they do professionally done something worth taking pride in? Because outside of the very rare case of people doing charity for significant amounts of their free time I honestly can't say "yes" to any group that comes to mind.

 

[GestaltEsper]

So...has geek/nerd culture ever done something positive/worth taking pride in?

Has any group that isn't doing what they do professionally done something worth taking pride in? Because outside of the very rare case of people doing charity for significant amounts of their free time I honestly can't say "yes" to any group that comes to mind.

True, but like I said in the part you cut out, I don't get why people'd willingly indoctrinate themselves in a group where, as can be seen by this very topic, no good things can be said.

 

[Zontar]

True, but like I said in the part you cut out, I don't get why people'd willingly indoctrinate themselves in a group where, as can be seen by this very topic, no good things can be said.

Because it's not about the good or great things that are done. It's about the ability to easily find people who share your interests in the same way you do. Being a geek or a nerd is an attitude that all humans has towards something that's specifically focused on a subset of topics, and how much one immerses themselves into said topics.

It's like those people who are really obsessed with food. You know, foodies. It's a descriptor for behavioural patterns towards certain things that are used for simplicity's sake. Often they originate from outside sources (basically you don't choose to be a nerd, you're identified as one) before eventually expensing into being more then that.

 

[Jux]

So basically you don't have any evidence to contradict my observations?

...that's not really the way it works. If I say "I've observed that overwhelmingly, Trump supporters are racists and neo Nazis with about as much sense as a clam." and someone asks me to provide evidence for this observation, just reiterating "It's what I've observed" is just going into the realm of 'well that's like, my opinion bro'. It's not on him to provide evidence to disprove your assertion, this is debate 101.

 

[Zontar]

Snip

Jux, we already got a message ending the conversation [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.938029-Your-thoughts-on-Nerd-Geek-culture-of-today?page=8#23646768]. This isn't starting again because it'll probably get this thread closed.

 

[Jux]

My post has nothing to do with Quinn or gamergate though, I don't see the issue.

 

[Superbeast]

That doesn't change the fact that nerds and geeks, actual nerds and geeks and not people who are jumping on the nerd culture bandwagon like Wil Wheaton or Felicia Day, do have a serious problem. The media still loves portraying nerds and geeks as at best children who never grew up, and you have professionals within the news industry openly calling for bullying against nerds and geeks to put us back in our place.

Nerd culture going mainstream was something quite a few people wanted to see be made separate from nerds.

And this is why I dislike certain aspects of "geek/nerd culture". Will Wheaton and Felicia Day are "jumping on the cultural bandwagon"?

Will Wheaton who was a main character in Star Trek; who went to work for a company product testing computer video editing software; voice acted in cartoons, video games, sci-fi & fantasy audiobooks, and anime; has done video podcasts for the NASA rover landing and a variety of Sci-Fi cast & crew interviews; who is an avid D&D player, including playing live in front of an audience at PAX 2010, 2011 & 2012, being Dungeon Master of a series of D&D Online quests, and having a column in the D&D magazine; hosts a show about playing card, board and dice games and playing them with celebrities; has written a comic book; wrote a column for a video gaming club magazine; is just "jumping on the band wagon"? What the hell do you have to do to count as a geek or a nerd these days?

The problem is that isn't at all what the Human Right Commission does. They actually almost never even touch on sexual harassment (that almost always goes straight to the courts with no middle man). What they do most of the time is bring people in for saying something that someone (who almost always is missing exactly 33 bones) took offence to. The Canadian Human Rights Commission isn't about upholding the law, it's about trying to police society outside the framework of the constitution. Or at least that is what it has become. Which is why it has a downright abysmal rate of courts throwing out their rulings due to violating the constitution or the bill of rights.

I don't know how things are in the UK, but in Canada our HRC is only respected by two groups: themselves and the Federal Liberal Party. That's about it.

I'll take your word with a little suspicion, knowing your position on Canadian politics from threads around the time of the Canadian election, but even if what you say is entirely true, this case has never been appealed - which if it was complete bull as well as being precedent-setting I am certain a lawyer would agree to take on the appeal pro-bono/reduced rate for a major portfolio boost.

 

[Lacedaemonius]

It's funny that "Nerd culture" is designed by and marketed to people who wouldn't have a clue which end of the protractor to shove up their ass... :|

Now it's just a canard for alt-left and alt-right to try and drag bystanders into their endless shitflinging.