Gamergate

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:36 am UTC

Weeks wrote:If you don't want to talk about it then simply stop talking about it instead of attempting to police the discussion into what you deem isn't "toxic".


Sounds fair then. I refuse to go down that path. You can go ahead without me. Part of it is that I don't really know how to respond to comments like that aside from posting toxic things that antigamergate has done.

But hey, if you want me to agree with something, I can agree that there's some fucked up shit going on under the #GamerGate banner. So I'll give ya that.

omgryebread wrote:Look, I'm sorry, but I'm not strawmanning. Ethics in video game journalism is important, and we need the conversation. GamerGate is not that conversation, no matter how much it claims to be.

You say you read my post, but you clearly didn't follow the threads that show the bankrupt origin of GamerGate and the complete lack of conversation about it's stated noble goals.


Let me requote myself then, in case you missed it.

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=110208&start=80#p3673288
I've also made it clear that #GamerGate is a political movement. It isn't about issues, but its about politics, gaining allies and supporters through whatever means necessary. Zoe and Anita have harmed feminist causes in their attempt to burn #GamerGate, while people on behalf of #GamerGate have also made some strange and contradictory moves on their own.


We seem to be in agreement on the issue of #GamerGate not really talking about games journalism as much as they could. I characterize this fight as a political one, not something for debate. Its about taking sides, not really about making points or talking through issues.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Alien-lizard city, Panama

Re: Gamergate

Postby Weeks » Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:10 am UTC

You seem to want to talk through...something. I have no idea what it is because you keep talking about it all being politics!! or whatever.

KnightExemplar wrote:Part of it is that I don't really know how to respond to comments like that aside from posting toxic things that antigamergate has done.
Why not just do that? If it turns out it's wrong someone will point it out. If it's not it'll be acknowledged. What's the problem? This is on-topic, no one is flaming you, go ahead, speak.

Or just keep coming back and saying it's toxic over and over until you are completely ignored.
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Kewangji wrote:I'd buy you chili ice cream if you were here, or some other incongruous sweet.
natraj wrote:i have a bizarre mental block against the very idea of people enjoying mint and chocolate together.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:20 am UTC

Weeks, I'm not entirely sure what you want from me. I've stated from the beginning of this thread that I don't want to get too deep into this shitfest, and thus, I'm drawing the line here. If you want to know what my strategy is, its simple. To disassemble the drama so that we can move forward. Making attacks against Zoe Quinn, Kotaku or others on the antiGamerGate side doesn't quite accomplish my goal.

Besides, if you want to see arguments for pro#GamerGate, I'm sure you can Google them on your own. But no, I'm not going to throw mud at antiGamerGate for the sake of argument.

I do remain interested in this whole #GamerGate thingy on an academic level... so I'll probably continue to talk about it. But I don't want to contribute to the hellhole discussion that it has become elsewhere on the internet.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4500
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Oct 24, 2014 3:19 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:omgryebread, although I'm not quoting your post, be assured that I have read it in its entirety. I've tried made it clear earlier in this thread that I consider this entire event to be a toxic wasteland of discussion. Following your post precisely would lead us to the epicenter of that toxic wasteland, so I hope you understand why I'm not following you up in the typical way.

I will say that both sides have actors who have engaged in truly toxic actions throughout this "controversy". I've also made it clear that #GamerGate is a political movement. It isn't about issues, but its about politics, gaining allies and supporters through whatever means necessary. Zoe and Anita have harmed feminist causes in their attempt to burn #GamerGate, while people on behalf of #GamerGate have also made some strange and contradictory moves on their own.

This wildfire of flames and trolls will will continue as long as people aren't explicitly pointing out the true cause of this discussion. In particular, your attempt to characterize #GamerGate is explicitly to create an effigy of them, so you can burn them personally. I can't fault you for your behavior... its what the majority of the internet is doing... on both sides of this issue.

But this technique of arguing what the other side is saying, only so that you can tear it down? This is the classic straw man fallacy. A formal fallacy that honestly doesn't further debate in the slightest. I argue, that it is the constant strawman arguments that have escalated this matter to the point that it is at right now. So I try to have no part in that form of discussion.


Now here's what I don't understand. If GamerGate is supposedly about journalistic ethics and collusion with the industry, surely Anita Sarkeesian represents a great example of game reviewing done right. She's self-funded through Kickstarter, isn't beheld to the industry in any way, and seems pretty smart and knows what she's talking about. She's engaging in higher criticism not only of individual games, but of the medium as a whole, treating it as a legitimate art form along side books and movies. Even if you don't like her politics, if you care about journalistic ethics, why isn't she the quintessential example of how to do gaming journalism right?

aoeu
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 4:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby aoeu » Fri Oct 24, 2014 3:39 am UTC

LaserGuy wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:omgryebread, although I'm not quoting your post, be assured that I have read it in its entirety. I've tried made it clear earlier in this thread that I consider this entire event to be a toxic wasteland of discussion. Following your post precisely would lead us to the epicenter of that toxic wasteland, so I hope you understand why I'm not following you up in the typical way.

I will say that both sides have actors who have engaged in truly toxic actions throughout this "controversy". I've also made it clear that #GamerGate is a political movement. It isn't about issues, but its about politics, gaining allies and supporters through whatever means necessary. Zoe and Anita have harmed feminist causes in their attempt to burn #GamerGate, while people on behalf of #GamerGate have also made some strange and contradictory moves on their own.

This wildfire of flames and trolls will will continue as long as people aren't explicitly pointing out the true cause of this discussion. In particular, your attempt to characterize #GamerGate is explicitly to create an effigy of them, so you can burn them personally. I can't fault you for your behavior... its what the majority of the internet is doing... on both sides of this issue.

But this technique of arguing what the other side is saying, only so that you can tear it down? This is the classic straw man fallacy. A formal fallacy that honestly doesn't further debate in the slightest. I argue, that it is the constant strawman arguments that have escalated this matter to the point that it is at right now. So I try to have no part in that form of discussion.


Now here's what I don't understand. If GamerGate is supposedly about journalistic ethics and collusion with the industry, surely Anita Sarkeesian represents a great example of game reviewing done right. She's self-funded through Kickstarter, isn't beheld to the industry in any way, and seems pretty smart and knows what she's talking about. She's engaging in higher criticism not only of individual games, but of the medium as a whole, treating it as a legitimate art form along side books and movies. Even if you don't like her politics, if you care about journalistic ethics, why isn't she the quintessential example of how to do gaming journalism right?

How is Anita Sarkeesian GamerGate(TM)? I realize OP started this on a very retarded note, but still I'm amazed how freely people conflate things, to their own detriment in the eyes of anyone with half a brain. That also makes any demands to "change names so you'd look better" look pretty funny.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Oct 24, 2014 4:25 am UTC

aoeu wrote:How is Anita Sarkeesian GamerGate(TM)? I realize OP started this on a very retarded note, but still I'm amazed how freely people conflate things, to their own detriment in the eyes of anyone with half a brain. That also makes any demands to "change names so you'd look better" look pretty funny.


Anita Sarkeesian is anti-GamerGate, for better or for worse. Its where the lines in the sand have been drawn. Sarkeesian hates GamerGaters, and GamerGaters hate her.

LaserGuy wrote:Now here's what I don't understand. If GamerGate is supposedly about journalistic ethics and collusion with the industry, surely Anita Sarkeesian represents a great example of game reviewing done right. She's self-funded through Kickstarter, isn't beheld to the industry in any way, and seems pretty smart and knows what she's talking about. She's engaging in higher criticism not only of individual games, but of the medium as a whole, treating it as a legitimate art form along side books and movies. Even if you don't like her politics, if you care about journalistic ethics, why isn't she the quintessential example of how to do gaming journalism right?


Again, this is about politics, not about issues. So try not to conflate the two.

Anita Sarkeesian supports Zoe Quinn, Zoe Quinn attacked 4Chan and TFYC. Also, she's anti-GamerGate on her twitter. Therefore, Anita Sarkeesian is anti#GamerGate.

If you look to see how arbitrary these lines are, the more you realize that its about political posturing and not about issues. After all, is not Vivian James the kind of woman you'd want to be a character in a video game? She was created so that an all-female team of video game designers can create a female game from the ground up. So why has Anita Sarkeesian and anti#GamerGaters attacked and vilified Vivian James? Simple, because Vivian James is "not on their side". So the symbol must be torn down and attacked.

To quote the image I posted... "We're not like those BAD feminists... We actually want to help video games and promote equality!" (Pro-#GamerGate Anonymous)

But really, is there really a "good" and "bad" feminist to this story? There's only feminists on #GamerGate side, and feminists on anti-#GamerGate side.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9877
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:45 pm UTC

Ok this may seem weird, but that's the first time I ever saw Vivian James. Am I the only one who thinks she's way better looking than most of the women in video games? I mean most seem to be walking caricatures of women with a caricature of a weapon, which I will now refer to as 'swordwhores'. James at least looks human.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7418
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Gamergate

Postby Zamfir » Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:20 pm UTC

That's the point, right? The link says ' let's troll everyone by creating an average girl, they expect some pedocrap from us' and apparently the colors of the sweater are an in-joke about Dragonball Z porn. I wouldn't count that much in their favour.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4500
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:32 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
LaserGuy wrote:Now here's what I don't understand. If GamerGate is supposedly about journalistic ethics and collusion with the industry, surely Anita Sarkeesian represents a great example of game reviewing done right. She's self-funded through Kickstarter, isn't beheld to the industry in any way, and seems pretty smart and knows what she's talking about. She's engaging in higher criticism not only of individual games, but of the medium as a whole, treating it as a legitimate art form along side books and movies. Even if you don't like her politics, if you care about journalistic ethics, why isn't she the quintessential example of how to do gaming journalism right?


Again, this is about politics, not about issues. So try not to conflate the two.


So you're saying this isn't about misogyny in video games and video game culture and/or journalistic ethics? That this is just a bunch of children screaming at each other for no reason at all?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:54 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:So you're saying this isn't about misogyny in video games and video game culture and/or journalistic ethics? That this is just a bunch of children screaming at each other for no reason at all?


Not quite. With Anita Sarkeesian getting death threats from somebody, she then needs to find out who her "enemy" is and attack them. I don't really think it is childish of her to lash out when she's been getting scary calls from people and death threats. But I to believe she's using "misogyny" as a tool to rally her supporters. Its probably her go-to plan for attack / defense online, what she is familiar with.

Which is why #NotYourShield exists, because a large number of people don't like the concept of another feminist using feminism as a whole as their go-to strategy.

Similarly, "Journalistic Ethics" has been an effective rallying term for convincing Intel, Mercedes, Nissan, and other companies from dropping support of Gawker, Polygon, etc. etc. As long as that argument is accomplishing the goals of #GamerGate, they'll continue to use it.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:56 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5092
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Gamergate

Postby Xeio » Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:56 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:If you look to see how arbitrary these lines are, the more you realize that its about political posturing and not about issues. After all, is not Vivian James the kind of woman you'd want to be a character in a video game? She was created so that an all-female team of video game designers can create a female game from the ground up. So why has Anita Sarkeesian and anti#GamerGaters attacked and vilified Vivian James? Simple, because Vivian James is "not on their side". So the symbol must be torn down and attacked.
I dunno, as a movement they seem to loudly oppose any sort of discussion in games media of opinions, and seem to hate any sort of positive change to portrayals of women in actual games. Their mascot is clearly just a PR move, it doesn't really mean anything if it doesn't go beyond a mascot.

GG loudly scream about the polygon review of Bayonetta. Not because it's unethical, not because there was corrpution, but because they hate the idea that games can be looked at as media.
Last edited by Xeio on Fri Oct 24, 2014 3:00 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:59 pm UTC

Xeio wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:If you look to see how arbitrary these lines are, the more you realize that its about political posturing and not about issues. After all, is not Vivian James the kind of woman you'd want to be a character in a video game? She was created so that an all-female team of video game designers can create a female game from the ground up. So why has Anita Sarkeesian and anti#GamerGaters attacked and vilified Vivian James? Simple, because Vivian James is "not on their side". So the symbol must be torn down and attacked.
I dunno, for a movement so loudly opposing any sort of discussion in games media of opinions, they sure seem to hate any sort of positive change to portrayals of women in actual games. Their mascot is clearly just a PR move, it doesn't really mean anything if it doesn't go beyond a mascot.


I think $70,000 to TFYCs in support of female game programmers was also a kind gesture. The creation of Vivian James was only part of the deal that symbolizes what they're trying to represent.

I mean, GG loudly scream about the polygon review of Bayonetta. Not because it's unethical, not because there was corrpution, but because they hate the idea that games can be looked at as media.


They're screaming loudly at Polygon because Polygon has been deemed anti#GamerGate.

It has nothing to do with the content, #GamerGaters probably didn't even read the review. That's not the point, "Polygon is evil because they're on the other side".
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5092
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Gamergate

Postby Xeio » Fri Oct 24, 2014 3:02 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:It has nothing to do with the content, #GamerGaters probably didn't even read the review. That's not the point, "Polygon is evil because they're on the other side".
Yes it does. Have you actually read anything over at /r/KotakuInAction?

They explicitly cite that as a problem with games journalism. That journalists have opinions that may or may not be feminist. That criticizing jokes as racist is censorship.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4500
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Oct 24, 2014 3:06 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Similarly, "Journalistic Ethics" has been an effective rallying term for convincing Intel, Mercedes, Nissan, and other companies from dropping support of Gawker, Polygon, etc. etc. As long as that argument is accomplishing the goals of #GamerGate, they'll continue to use it.


What are the goals of #GamerGate, specifically?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Oct 24, 2014 3:16 pm UTC

Xeio wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:It has nothing to do with the content, #GamerGaters probably didn't even read the review. That's not the point, "Polygon is evil because they're on the other side".
Yes it does. Have you actually read anything over at /r/KotakuInAction?

They explicitly cite that as a problem with games journalism. That journalists have opinions.


There's no point in arguing with them at that level. Polygon has "poisoned the well" because they had one or to articles that were pro Anita Sarkeesian and anti#GamerGate. As you point out, the "Ethical Journalism" argument #GamerGate is pushing falls apart rather quickly. Its a rallying cry to unite the mob.

LaserGuy wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Similarly, "Journalistic Ethics" has been an effective rallying term for convincing Intel, Mercedes, Nissan, and other companies from dropping support of Gawker, Polygon, etc. etc. As long as that argument is accomplishing the goals of #GamerGate, they'll continue to use it.


What are the goals of #GamerGate, specifically?


They're a mob in search of a goal. That goal might be "Ethical Journalism" at the end of this.

Its easier to study why they're angry... which I suspect is more because they've been kicked out of their "home" on the internet. Reddit/gaming for example was censoring discussion on the issue, and moderators have been tweeting to Zoe Quinn directly. So honestly, this is your typical mass-forum exodus as internet culture realigns itself.

Gamefaqs LUEsers was my first experience with watching an internet mob grow angry and going somewhere else. 4Chan itself was an offshoot of Something Awful. So these sorts of mass-exodus events happen from time to time.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5092
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Gamergate

Postby Xeio » Fri Oct 24, 2014 3:25 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:There's no point in arguing with them at that level. Polygon has "poisoned the well" because they had one or to articles that were pro Anita Sarkeesian and anti#GamerGate. As you point out, the "Ethical Journalism" argument #GamerGate is pushing falls apart rather quickly. Its a rallying cry to unite the mob.
If their rallying cry has more holes than swiss cheese, and consists of the entire supposed goodness of their cause, I'm going to argue the hell out of it. Their cause has failed, miserably. At the only thing they say they're trying to accomplish.

It's a tirade against any journalism they don't like. There is no "ethics" concerns here.

User avatar
setzer777
Good questions sometimes get stupid answers
Posts: 2762
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:24 am UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby setzer777 » Fri Oct 24, 2014 4:09 pm UTC

So...gamergate is basically an insular circle-jerk of whiny losers that hasn't managed to accomplish anything except retaliate against those who slander the gamergate name? Is that an accurate summary?

Also, what's the shit about "gamer culture" being intruded upon? Being an early adopter of some consumer product doesn't make you part of some "rich cultural heritage" that needs defending.
Meaux_Pas wrote:We're here to go above and beyond.

Too infinity
of being an arsehole

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4500
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Oct 24, 2014 4:17 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
LaserGuy wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Similarly, "Journalistic Ethics" has been an effective rallying term for convincing Intel, Mercedes, Nissan, and other companies from dropping support of Gawker, Polygon, etc. etc. As long as that argument is accomplishing the goals of #GamerGate, they'll continue to use it.


What are the goals of #GamerGate, specifically?


They're a mob in search of a goal. That goal might be "Ethical Journalism" at the end of this.


How can they both not have a goal and accomplish a goal?

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5092
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Gamergate

Postby Xeio » Fri Oct 24, 2014 4:54 pm UTC

setzer777 wrote:So...gamergate is basically an insular circle-jerk of whiny losers that hasn't managed to accomplish anything except retaliate against those who slander the gamergate name? Is that an accurate summary?

Also, what's the shit about "gamer culture" being intruded upon? Being an early adopter of some consumer product doesn't make you part of some "rich cultural heritage" that needs defending.
"Whiny losers" might be a bit harsh.

The movement is on the whole, but there are some people in it that aren't . The problem is at this point they're lost in the circlejerk of "if you're not with us you're against us" and won't take a good long look at what has actually come out of GamerGate, rather than what their idyllic version of GamerGate is. As though opposing GamerGate means we want corruption in games jounalism or something...

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Oct 24, 2014 9:25 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:How can they both not have a goal and accomplish a goal?


I get it. There's multiple interpretations of the word "goal". They have a short-term goal, and that is to discredit Polygon, Gawker, etc. etc. And they're doing a good job at it too, with more and more companies pulling ad funding out of those media.

Which is why I think they'll probably successfully pivot towards "ethics in journalism", since most of what they've accomplished is at least mildly related to their current campaigns.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5092
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Gamergate

Postby Xeio » Fri Oct 24, 2014 10:54 pm UTC

They still think it's unethical to include opinions in reviews. That there exists some objective metric by which to judge video games.

So I would be massively impressed if they do anything other than pivot in a circle.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: Gamergate

Postby ahammel » Sat Oct 25, 2014 12:26 am UTC

Xeio wrote:They still think it's unethical to include opinions in reviews.

Somebody better run tell the people who write reviews of all other media.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
mobiusstripsearch
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:21 am UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby mobiusstripsearch » Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:24 am UTC

http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/23/gawke ... em-anyway/

Just one example of what GamerGate supporters actually talk about.

First was Sam Biddle calling for nerds to be viciously bullied, which led to email campaigns convincing Intel, Mercedes-Benz, and Adobe to pull advertising from the unrepentantly pro-bullying site. Demonstrating vast chutzpah, Gawker’s Max Read went on to claim that Intel “is run by craven idiots,” “employs pusillanimous morons,” and without even a hint of irony, that the tech company “lacks integrity.”

The message is clear and obvious: if you pull your advertising from the pro-bullying, vapidly disingenuous rag, you’re just a piece of shit and Gawker doesn’t need you anyway. The passive-aggressive attitude of the site’s “journalists” constitutes an implicit threat to other advertisers Gawker fears might want to dissociate themselves from the explicit approval of bullying. “Continue advertising with us, or we’ll say nasty, defamatory things about you like we did with Intel,” is the implicit threat.
"The inward skies of man will accompany him across any void upon which he ventures and will be with him to the end of time." -- Loren Eiseley

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Sat Oct 25, 2014 2:07 am UTC

I think that a major point here, is that while its okay for us to say that #GamerGate is a senseless mob of the internet, everyone holds Gawker up to higher standards than that. Gawker needs to elevate itself above the discussion and be a paradigm, or risk being pulled down to #GamerGate's level.

That said, early in this controversy I do think that #GamerGate managed to get some concessions from Kotaku, although it seems like these concessions have been forgotten by now. For example, Kotaku banned the use of Patreon while talking about indie video games.

http://kotaku.com/a-brief-note-about-th ... 1627041269

We've also agreed that funding any developers through services such as Patreon introduce needless potential conflicts of interest and are therefore nixing any such contributions by our writers. Some may disagree that Patreons are a conflict. That's a debate for journalism critics.


Basically, Kotaku writers are no longer allowed to write about video games they're funding through Patreon (a crowdsourcing website). So things are indeed, "getting done" thanks to #GamerGate. It has been a while since I've seen positive news about this story however (the Kotaku policy change happened early in this controversy, still around the last week of August 2014).
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6003
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Gamergate

Postby Thesh » Sat Oct 25, 2014 2:30 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
We've also agreed that funding any developers through services such as Patreon introduce needless potential conflicts of interest and are therefore nixing any such contributions by our writers. Some may disagree that Patreons are a conflict. That's a debate for journalism critics.


Basically, Kotaku writers are no longer allowed to write about video games they're funding through Patreon (a crowdsourcing website). So things are indeed, "getting done" thanks to #GamerGate. It has been a while since I've seen positive news about this story however (the Kotaku policy change happened early in this controversy, still around the last week of August 2014).


Ah yes, they achieved uh... That. So writers are no longer able to write about games they are funding through a service where they don't stand to benefit if the game does well. I mean, if they have stock in EA, that's one thing, but funding games through a crowdsourcing website, that's another story.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
Paul in Saudi
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:52 pm UTC
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Re: Gamergate

Postby Paul in Saudi » Sat Oct 25, 2014 9:35 am UTC

I am a complete expert on Gamergate, having just now read a summary article in the Washington Post, one that I cannot be bothered to link to. I see some links;

1. I seem to recall a year or two ago a woman at a convention of gamer designers reported on the sexist comments of a number of her male counterparts. IIRC at least one or two people were fired.

2. A month or so ago was The Fappening, the publication of some number of naked photos of actresses even I have heard of it. What I found remarkable was the huge enthusiasm for the leak, until a counter-surge of condemnation took over. The leak is now commonly (and correctly) called at least an invasion of privacy, or even a sex crime.

3. Now we have an instance of revenge porn in the insular world of gamers spilling over to actual physical threats against women. There has been a rather massive backlash against this.

The internet has turned over a number of filthy rocks. What is remarkable is the increasing number of decent people who seem to have decided that enough is enough and this sort of thing has gone too far. I suppose I am an optimist, but perhaps there is still hope for mankind, including those of us who hang out online.

User avatar
setzer777
Good questions sometimes get stupid answers
Posts: 2762
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:24 am UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby setzer777 » Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:32 pm UTC

As someone who frequents Gawker sites, I think expecting journalistic professionalism from them is misguided at best.
Meaux_Pas wrote:We're here to go above and beyond.

Too infinity
of being an arsehole

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Gamergate

Postby Lazar » Sat Oct 25, 2014 2:07 pm UTC

Paul in Saudi wrote:1. I seem to recall a year or two ago a woman at a convention of gamer designers reported on the sexist comments of a number of her male counterparts. IIRC at least one or two people were fired.

I'd rather not wade into this mess, but I don't think the case you're citing fits into a grand narrative. Two developers in Richards' vicinity were making some mild innuendos in conversation with each other, of the sort that almost all people make from time to time (including, as noted in the ArsTechnica piece, Richards herself), and she decided to publicly shame them, which resulted in one of them being fired. She was fired by her own company (justifiably, in my opinion) for engaging in this kind of behavior.
Exit the vampires' castle.

User avatar
Paul in Saudi
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:52 pm UTC
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Re: Gamergate

Postby Paul in Saudi » Sat Oct 25, 2014 2:55 pm UTC

You may be right. As I said, I have read exactly one article about all this.

jseah
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:18 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby jseah » Sat Oct 25, 2014 3:33 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Those things are merely being used as tools. Weapons, more accurately.

Amen. I have become more disillusioned of arguments and general discourse in the recent few months. (call it the waning of youthful idealism as I become a working adult if you want)

Seems to me that alot of so called discussion is about groups using social weapons on each other. Add a realization that empiricism and rationality (that I held in high regard and still try to adhere to) don't help you choose which principles, only how to put them into effect.

And two people/groups with different principles may not ever be able to find common ground and you end up with bashing each other over the head with rocks (and all following descendants of that tactic). Or in this case, applying social pressure as weapons to make the other argument go away.
Stories:
Time is Like a River - consistent time travel to the hilt
A Hero's War
Tensei Simulator build 18 - A python RPG

User avatar
omgryebread
Posts: 1393
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:03 am UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby omgryebread » Sat Oct 25, 2014 4:56 pm UTC

mobiusstripsearch wrote:http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/23/gawker-our-advertisers-are-scum-who-needs-them-anyway/

Just one example of what GamerGate supporters actually talk about.

First was Sam Biddle calling for nerds to be viciously bullied, which led to email campaigns convincing Intel, Mercedes-Benz, and Adobe to pull advertising from the unrepentantly pro-bullying site. Demonstrating vast chutzpah, Gawker’s Max Read went on to claim that Intel “is run by craven idiots,” “employs pusillanimous morons,” and without even a hint of irony, that the tech company “lacks integrity.”

The message is clear and obvious: if you pull your advertising from the pro-bullying, vapidly disingenuous rag, you’re just a piece of shit and Gawker doesn’t need you anyway. The passive-aggressive attitude of the site’s “journalists” constitutes an implicit threat to other advertisers Gawker fears might want to dissociate themselves from the explicit approval of bullying. “Continue advertising with us, or we’ll say nasty, defamatory things about you like we did with Intel,” is the implicit threat.
You know what. You clearly can't be bothered to read the thread, so I'm not sure why I'm responding, so I'm just gonna copy-paste myself from the last page.

Let's take a look at another aspect of GamerGate. Is it fighting back against "bullying" that criticizes gamers as losers? Like Sam Biddle's awful tweet. Surely it condemns anyone who chacterizes gamers that way? Like what about this article that insults gamers and games repeatedly because of the actions of a few bad actors. Surely this author, Milo Yiannopoulos must be a target of GamerGate?

You can't help but feel it's a game for frustrated beta males who can't kill or shag anything in real life, so get their kicks doing it on a computer screen.

Is it me, or do these weirdos need therapy and their internet connections taken away by mum?


Hahah nope. That asshole is considered an ally of #GamerGate

But GamerGate is against bullying too! That's why they love this guy for challenging Sam Biddle to a boxing match! Yep. This guy.

. @hugoschwyzer Why don't you do the world a favor, man up, and kill yourself? Fucking coward.

I had never heard of "gaming media" until recently. Jesus Christ, guys, put down the fucking video games and stop reading retarded sites.

@rooshv Girls don't get it. If an interesting man is looking for good conversation, he'd rather talk to a man.


These aren't fringe people in the movement. These aren't
Tyndmyr wrote:a subset of assclowns
These are people GamerGate is holding up as leaders. These are the people they retweet and make threads to praise.

But no, GamerGate is all about ethics and anti-bullying.

What the fuck kind of anti-bullying movement makes rape threats? What the fuck kind of anti-bullying movement allies with noted bullies?
avatar from Nononono by Lynn Okamoto.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:24 pm UTC

As I've explained earlier, its about very much about politics, not about issues.

Milo Yiannopoulos praised #GamerGate, therefore, he is pro#GamerGate.

Milo: Yeah, as I said, it’s everywhere and gaming is one of the last industries to get affected by it, in fact. What’s different, though, is I’ve never seen the level of fightback against unfair, inaccurate characterisations as the gaming community has mustered. It’s impressive and they should keep fighting, because they have right on their side.


As long as you're pro#GamerGate, you'll get #GamerGate support. If you're anti#GamerGate, you'll get anti#GamerGate support. Not much else matters.

omgryebread wrote:What the fuck kind of anti-bullying movement makes rape threats? What the fuck kind of anti-bullying movement allies with noted bullies?


What, do you expect #GamerGate to vet the people they follow? They're a mob, they listen to people "on their side", and attack people "not on their side". Aint nobody got time for that vetting stuff. Actually, the obsession over finding out "problems" with people supporting others is kind of a ridiculous American Tradition. It works though, so I can't blame ya for it. (#GamerGate also has been using the technique of mudslinging, so... yeah, its not like they're not doing it either)
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
omgryebread
Posts: 1393
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:03 am UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby omgryebread » Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:44 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:As I've explained earlier, its about very much about politics, not about issues.

Milo Yiannopoulos praised #GamerGate, therefore, he is pro#GamerGate.

Milo: Yeah, as I said, it’s everywhere and gaming is one of the last industries to get affected by it, in fact. What’s different, though, is I’ve never seen the level of fightback against unfair, inaccurate characterisations as the gaming community has mustered. It’s impressive and they should keep fighting, because they have right on their side.


As long as you're pro#GamerGate, you'll get #GamerGate support. If you're anti#GamerGate, you'll get anti#GamerGate support. Not much else matters.

omgryebread wrote:What the fuck kind of anti-bullying movement makes rape threats? What the fuck kind of anti-bullying movement allies with noted bullies?


What, do you expect #GamerGate to vet the people they follow? They're a mob, they listen to people "on their side", and attack people "not on their side". Aint nobody got time for that vetting stuff. Actually, the obsession over finding out "problems" with people supporting others is kind of a ridiculous American Tradition. It works though, so I can't blame ya for it. (#GamerGate also has been using the technique of mudslinging, so... yeah, its not like they're not doing it either)
I don't think anyone gets your point.

The whole anti-GG side is really about how GG is just identity politics in its basest form. We're saying they aren't a movement for any sort of real change beyond enforcing a certain identity in video games and games journalism.

I'm honestly not sure if you disagree with that or not.
avatar from Nononono by Lynn Okamoto.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:46 pm UTC

omgryebread wrote:The whole anti-GG side is really about how GG is just identity politics in its basest form. We're saying they aren't a movement for any sort of real change beyond enforcing a certain identity in video games and games journalism.


Get rid of the bolded part, and then I'll agree with you. (I'll even throw in the fact that changing "Games Journalism" is a goal they made after they realized they didn't have a goal uniting them)

When a feminist chooses the side of #GamerGate, she will get a huge amount of support and congratulations. They're a welcoming bunch, as long as you say that you're on #GamerGate side. They're set on praising anyone who chooses #GamerGate, and attacking anyone who criticizes them. That's it. There's no "enforcing of identities" involved. Again, Vivian James is their symbol (albet one with DBZ Porn injokes and the 4chan logo), but yes, a symbol upon which they're saying gamers should be inclusive and fun.

EDIT: I'm still somewhat convinced that their attacks on Kotaku / Polygon / etc. etc. are because of politics. In particular, those sites wrote anti#GamerGate stuff and supported Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian, so they're using "ethics in games journalism" to attack those guys. But based on how the movement is going, they seem to be moving towards "ethical games journalism" for real.... maybe... we'll see.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5965
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: Gamergate

Postby jestingrabbit » Sun Oct 26, 2014 7:20 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:a symbol upon which they're saying gamers should be inclusive and fun.


Well, gee, its nice to be nice to people who are nice to you, and nicer to be nice to symbols, but a woman who stands up and says she's afraid, who's got years in the gaming community, I guess its totally cool to dox.

http://kotaku.com/felicia-day-and-gamer ... 1650544129

I mean, for fucks sake, who are these people utterly incapable of taking the slightest criticism? And if they want games to be fun, why the fuck are they spending their time terrorising people?
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 1946
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Alien-lizard city, Panama

Re: Gamergate

Postby Weeks » Sun Oct 26, 2014 7:34 am UTC

Because terrorism is fun, duh. Just ask 4chan!
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Kewangji wrote:I'd buy you chili ice cream if you were here, or some other incongruous sweet.
natraj wrote:i have a bizarre mental block against the very idea of people enjoying mint and chocolate together.

Derek
Posts: 2176
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby Derek » Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:08 am UTC

jestingrabbit wrote:I mean, for fucks sake, who are these people utterly incapable of taking the slightest criticism?

I'm not seeing the anti-GGers taking criticism any better.

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5965
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: Gamergate

Postby jestingrabbit » Sun Oct 26, 2014 11:17 am UTC

Derek wrote:
jestingrabbit wrote:I mean, for fucks sake, who are these people utterly incapable of taking the slightest criticism?

I'm not seeing the anti-GGers taking criticism any better.

So, the anti GGers have created an environment where their detractors are afraid to speakout? What utter bullshit.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Gamergate

Postby KnightExemplar » Sun Oct 26, 2014 2:29 pm UTC

jestingrabbit wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:a symbol upon which they're saying gamers should be inclusive and fun.


Well, gee, its nice to be nice to people who are nice to you, and nicer to be nice to symbols, but a woman who stands up and says she's afraid, who's got years in the gaming community, I guess its totally cool to dox.

http://kotaku.com/felicia-day-and-gamer ... 1650544129

I mean, for fucks sake, who are these people utterly incapable of taking the slightest criticism? And if they want games to be fun, why the fuck are they spending their time terrorising people?


The majority of posts I see on 8chan / KotakuInAction are along the lines that it was a false flag operation on behalf of anti-#GamerGaters. Not that that is proof that it was a false flag operation, but very few people actually condone the actions of doxxers.

http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/ ... on_felica/

Based on what I've seen in 8chan / KotakuInAction, they are very against doxxing of Felicia Day and are on a witch-hunt to uncover the identity of "gaimerg8" on Twitter, to determine which side he was working on. If anyone disagrees with me, please post a link describing otherwise.

There are a lot of false-flag accounts going around. Vivian James on #Twitter for example, is clearly anti#GamerGate. But Vivian James on Tumblr is pro#GamerGate. The anonymity of the internet is making it quite difficult to determine which side these actions are on.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5092
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Gamergate

Postby Xeio » Sun Oct 26, 2014 2:55 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:The majority of posts I see on 8chan / KotakuInAction are along the lines that it was a false flag operation on behalf of anti-#GamerGaters. Not that that is proof that it was a false flag operation, but very few people actually condone the actions of doxxers.

They say that, but didn't they have to move to 8chan in the first place because of the doxxing and harassment got them banned from 4chan?


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests