The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Asherian Command**

Aaaaand that is why games that deliver it get better marks than those that do not.

A very small amount of them do and they happen to be IGN and Polygon.. They mark down for not having multiplayer which is kind of stupid in my honest opinion. And yet again that should not be a factor in the first place. i do not mark skyrim down because it does not have multiplayer.

But you know as well as I that "criticism" can be labeled as hate mail and be ignored out of hand or pointed to (with some quoting out of context) to show how out of line gamers are.
It is a mass call-out for "do not feed the troll", we have an ignore button, why not apply to the increasingly irrelevant gaming "journalists"?

I am trying to figure out a way to take away that title of "journalists" they like to use, I think they make the real ones angry.
Rather helpful site: http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/

Nice quote here:
Gil Thelen, the former publisher and president of The Tampa Tribune, believes the journalist has a very specific role in society. He calls it the “committed observer.”
What he means by that, Thelen explains, is that the journalist is not removed from community, though at times may stand apart from others so as to view things from a different perspective.
Rather, says Thelen, journalists are “interdependent” with the needs of their fellow citizens. If there is a key issue in town that needs resolution and is being explored by local institutions, “we have a commitment to reporting on this process over the long term, as an observer.” The journalist helps resolve the issue by being a responsible reporter who supplies background, verifies facts, and explains the issues involved.

So it is rather comical that a "journalist is not removed from the community" but they have attempted to remove the community from the journalist instead!

I completely agree.

And Think I wrote about how criticism is sometimes mistaken for harassment which is kind of dumb. If you are well seasoned writer, you know what criticism is and you accept it.

You are in a position, and you can be criticized and that is a good.

I have no idea and I do not really care.

If you don't care. Then why are you on this thread? If you don't care about these journalists writing these things. Then why are you even here in the first place?

You have claimed your dislike for the movement and that you really don't care about the movement itself and find it uninspiring. So why would you want to comment on something that you don't care for?

Is it because you do in someway care about it. Are you interested in it?

Just saying I do not care about something, just makes me think you don't care about anything related to this issue.

If you don't care you might as well not comment.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Asherian Command wrote:
AThey mark down for not having multiplayer which is kind of stupid in my honest opinion.

They mark up games for having multiplayer, which makes total sense in my opinion.

Asherian Command wrote:
i do not mark skyrim down because it does not have multiplayer.

No, but you certainly do not mark it up because it has multiplayer.

Asherian Command wrote:
If you don't care. Then why are you on this thread?

Because I want to take part in the “off-topic” discussions you start, like how games are marked down for not having multiplayer!

**Asherian Command**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Bromsy wrote:
Can't play chess it's literally the worst game ever, it has a King (Patriarchy)as it's most important piece, a Queen (Tokenism, she's the only female), Bishops (Catholic Hate Mongers and probably child molesters), Rooks (Clearly a phallic symbol for Hetero Male Dominance and sexual identity repression - they only move in straight lines), Knights (Animal abuse much?), and Pawns (Classist propaganda), and not only that, the black side is forced to go last (Pure unadulterated racism).

Were there but room in my sig...

I'll do it.

Taking one for the team.....

Is the politics of all this as interesting to anyone else as it is to me? For example this guess at political leanings from Milo:

(Wardell has since said he's more libertarian)

Also just in general the interplay between people and factions such as comicgate, schisms in feminism (Sommers pro-gg, Sarkeesian anti-gg), left-right cooperation etc.

Interestingly enough that is quite correct. But I think it is quite correct. Interesting find. I mean it doesn't really tell us anything different. Other than there are opinions from people from the same sect.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kali wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
And that's your personal opinion. Mine is that games would be improved by making most of those changes. Now we've gone from the supposed "real issue" of corruption in journalism to nothing more than outrage that someone else has a different opinion about what games should be.
No, I think that's entirely mischaracterizing this discussion. Gaming journalism is incredibly corrupt, that much was well known long before this present scandal. Of course there are different flavors of corruption, though, and I personally despise the particular agenda attached to this contemporary type.

Of course I responded to you not out of concern for the issue of corruption in the industry, but because you seem to imply that the "feminist" values should be endorsed or passively accepted by "the gaming community."

I agree completely on that argument Kali!

I mean there are certain bits and pieces in the gamer gate issue that are corrupt.

Not doing anything and ignoring them is a great start but the next step is to force them to change.

**Peregrine**

Asherian Command wrote:
A very small amount of them do and they happen to be IGN and Polygon.. They mark down for not having multiplayer which is kind of stupid in my honest opinion. And yet again that should not be a factor in the first place. i do not mark skyrim down because it does not have multiplayer.

And, again, this is YOUR OPINION. You have a perfectly legitimate opinion that multiplayer is not essential and a game can be "perfect" without it. Another person might have an equally legitimate opinion that multiplayer is the most important part of gaming and therefore a game that doesn't have it will be mediocre at best. If you both review a game with no multiplayer you will probably give it very different reviews. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS SITUATION. The fact that someone else rates a game according to standards that you don't agree with is not a problem. The appropriate reaction to this is to say "well, I guess I should read a review from someone else whose preferences match mine", not to turn this into some bizarre internet crusade against game reviewers.

Also, this has absolutely nothing to do with corruption. You claim to be only talking about corruption (a legitimate issue) and complain when anyone you disagree with makes an "off topic" comment, but here you are continuing on your crusade against reviewers who commit the horrible crime of giving a game the "wrong" score.

**Asherian Command**

Peregrine wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
A very small amount of them do and they happen to be IGN and Polygon.. They mark down for not having multiplayer which is kind of stupid in my honest opinion. And yet again that should not be a factor in the first place. i do not mark skyrim down because it does not have multiplayer.

And, again, this is YOUR OPINION. You have a perfectly legitimate opinion that multiplayer is not essential and a game can be "perfect" without it. Another person might have an equally legitimate opinion that multiplayer is the most important part of gaming and therefore a game that doesn't have it will be mediocre at best. If you both review a game with no multiplayer you will probably give it very different reviews. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS SITUATION. The fact that someone else rates a game according to standards that you don't agree with is not a problem. The appropriate reaction to this is to say "well, I guess I should read a review from someone else whose preferences match mine", not to turn this into some bizarre internet crusade against game reviewers.

Also, this has absolutely nothing to do with corruption. You claim to be only talking about corruption (a legitimate issue) and complain when anyone you disagree with makes an "off topic" comment, but here you are continuing on your crusade against reviewers who commit the horrible crime of giving a game the "wrong" score.

I do have a legitmate opinion thank you for pointing that out.

But lets get back on topic. Read back a few pages.

I am trying to get a summary written up of the entire situation.

**Peregrine**

Asherian Command wrote:
But lets get back on topic. Read back a few pages.

Wow, you've reached a new low: complaining about being off topic in a discussion that you started.

**Asherian Command**

Peregrine wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
But lets get back on topic. Read back a few pages.

Wow, you've reached a new low: complaining about being off topic in a discussion that you started.

And?

I realize later on I was offtopic because I got really passionate on my own thread?

Yeah that happens.

I am a human being. I make mistakes.

**Peregrine**

Now perhaps you could learn a lesson from this and stop responding to "off-topic" statements from people you disagree with (but not people you agree with) by demanding that they shut up and get out of your thread because THIS IS ABOUT CORRUPTION IN JOURNALISM.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asherian Command wrote:
I am trying to get a summary written up of the entire situation.

Here's a good summary:

* Game journalists spend the past 20+ years being the equivalent of celebrity gossip magazines, and nobody really cares.
* Zoe Quinn does some questionable stuff that nobody would even know about if they weren't looking for a pet cause to get angry about.
* Anita Sarkeesian criticizes video games with the intent of improving them.
* The internet explodes, death threats are made, etc.
* Game websites post articles generalizing a bit too much and criticizing gamers as a whole for their behavior instead of including lots of disclaimers about "not all gamers are like this".
* Internet explodes even more.
* Game websites post articles saying "wow you people are a bunch of spoiled children", for understandable reasons.
* Twitter drama happens.
* Game websites say "screw this, we're done here" and start deleting/locking discussion of the whole mess.
* Internet explodes because OMFG CENSORSHIP.
* Anyone who has even a superficial understanding of censorship and free speech issues eyerolls at the above and wishes that the "free speech" crusaders would stop to understand the issues they're protesting.
* MOAR TWITTER DRAMA.
* MOAR FLAME WARS.

Here's my prediction for the future:

* Because hardly anyone cares about any of this stuff beyond having an excuse to be united in outrage they eventually get tired of it and stop participating.
* The internet's next pet cause arrives, and "gamergate" is completely forgotten because the new thing is so much more interesting.
* Certain websites may or may not recover the traffic they lost.
* The game journalism industry as a whole goes back to business as usual, because none of the things that caused corruption have changed.
* Nobody cares beyond occasionally laughing at how stupid game reviews are.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

You forgot the most important thing: video game reviews with marks still give better marks to a game with a good multiplayer mode over a similar game with no multiplayer.

**Asherian Command**

Peregrine wrote:
Now perhaps you could learn a lesson from this and stop responding to "off-topic" statements from people you disagree with (but not people you agree with) by demanding that they shut up and get out of your thread because THIS IS ABOUT CORRUPTION IN JOURNALISM.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asherian Command wrote:
I am trying to get a summary written up of the entire situation.

Here's a good summary:

* Game journalists spend the past 20+ years being the equivalent of celebrity gossip magazines, and nobody really cares.
* Zoe Quinn does some questionable stuff that nobody would even know about if they weren't looking for a pet cause to get angry about.
* Anita Sarkeesian criticizes video games with the intent of improving them.
* The internet explodes, death threats are made, etc.
* Game websites post articles generalizing a bit too much and criticizing gamers as a whole for their behavior instead of including lots of disclaimers about "not all gamers are like this".
* Internet explodes even more.
* Game websites post articles saying "wow you people are a bunch of spoiled children", for understandable reasons.
* Twitter drama happens.
* Game websites say "screw this, we're done here" and start deleting/locking discussion of the whole mess.
* Internet explodes because OMFG CENSORSHIP.
* Anyone who has even a superficial understanding of censorship and free speech issues eyerolls at the above and wishes that the "free speech" crusaders would stop to understand the issues they're protesting.
* MOAR TWITTER DRAMA.
* MOAR FLAME WARS.

Here's my prediction for the future:

* Because hardly anyone cares about any of this stuff beyond having an excuse to be united in outrage they eventually get tired of it and stop participating.
* The internet's next pet cause arrives, and "gamergate" is completely forgotten because the new thing is so much more interesting.
* Certain websites may or may not recover the traffic they lost.
* The game journalism industry as a whole goes back to business as usual, because none of the things that caused corruption have changed.
* Nobody cares beyond occasionally laughing at how stupid game reviews are.

That is a sad attempt at humor.
*Sigh*

Here is something for you to read: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1scc19j?new_post=true

Yes it is from me.

If you think this will end like the way you described it. I will give you three and a half hours to prove to me that there isn't change from this movement.

As you have forgotten about the ethical changes at kotaku and polygon and escapist. The three major groups. Gamers won basically and they will still continue to win. Ignoring that is acting like you didn't even read anything.

**VorpalBunny74**

Also Intel pulling their ads from Gamasutra is no small thing

**Asherian Command**

VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Also Intel pulling their ads from Gamasutra is no small thing

Neither is their change of ethical policies...

Or Escapist pulling out of the debcale and allowing conversations of it on their forums.

Also the people who came out and said we support gamergate is quite big as well

Just pushing it aside is just willful ignorance.

**Peregrine**

Asherian Command wrote:
If you think this will end like the way you described it. I will give you three and a half hours to prove to me that there isn't change from this movement.

I GIVE YOU THREE AND A HALF HOURS EXACTLY (NOT FOUR, NOT TWO) TO PROVE THAT THE FUTURE WILL HAPPEN THE WAY YOU THINK IT WILL. BE A PSYCHIC OR ADMIT DEFEAT.

As you have forgotten about the ethical changes at kotaku and polygon and escapist. The three major groups. Gamers won basically and they will still continue to win. Ignoring that is acting like you didn't even read anything.

Again, I'm talking about long-term changes. For example, has all this drama caused game publishers to change their policies on giving out early copies of games for reviewers to review? No? Well then guess what, reviewers are still going to have the same choice of "give this game a good score or risk losing access to the early copies I need to do my job" that they've had for the past 20+ years. And the trend of a major publisher being able to sell an empty box and get a "interesting potential but needs a bit of polish, 8/10" review will continue.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Also Intel pulling their ads from Gamasutra is no small thing

You're right, it isn't small. It's ridiculously, almost inconceivably, TINY. One advertiser pulling ads from one website (that already lost traffic numbers and made those adds a less appealing investment for purely business reasons) is barely even worth mentioning because it doesn't make any long-term changes. Someone else will probably buy the ad space, and Intel will continue to buy ads elsewhere. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Intel goes right back to buying the same ad space once people forget about the current drama.

And this is the biggest problem with "gamergate"*: it's focused on superficial appearances instead of substance. There's lots of short-term anger and demands for specific people/websites to at least pretend to change, but there's no productive solution to any of the real problems. Anger can't last forever, and once the anger goes away there will be nothing left.

*Well, the biggest problem that isn't the painfully stupid name.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asherian Command wrote:
Or Escapist pulling out of the debcale and allowing conversations of it on their forums.

Except that's a trophy victory, not a meaningful long-term accomplishment. In 40k terms it's the equivalent of celebrating making a successful armor save while your opponent controls all of the objectives and the game is about to end. You "won", but in the big picture that win means nothing.

**Talizvar**

Asherian Command wrote:
Here is something for you to read: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1scc19j?new_post=true

Yes it is from me.

Hehehe, no, some of it is from me.

I feel you should give me credit for the link and quote "for the uninformed" what it is to be a journalist...

I still maintain that ignoring key media outlets, removing some of their relevance and choosing more representative media is the ethical way to go.

**Asherian Command**

Talizvar wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
Here is something for you to read: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1scc19j?new_post=true

Yes it is from me.
Hehehe, no, some of it is from me.
I feel you should give me credit for the link and quote "for the uninformed" what it is to be a journalist...

I still maintain that ignoring key media outlets, removing some of their relevance and choosing more representative media is the ethical way to go.

I can't edit it :(

But thank you. I enjoyed the article.

Also.....
Slate:https://archive.today/V6Rbc

Yeah. I read this. And thought well then...

And then in related note. I talked to

About
Discover Games
This is the personal site of Shawn Trautman. Here I discuss videogames: why I love them; what we can do to make them better; and why it matters. Visit the tabs below to check out my reviews and other writing, and to ask questions or comment. Feel free to drop me a line and join the conversation.

I had a disagreement with him on a few things.

stormwarriors2:

discovergames:

gamejournosbehavingbadly:

Kotaku back in late 2011 attacking criticism of Call of Duty with a CLEAR bias.
I had to check the blog to make sure this isn’t satire, and it looks like it isn’t. This person apparently honestly thinks that a short piece about a widespread thing in gamer culture, which is very clearly marked “OPINION” in bold, capital letters at the start, is an example of “bias” in games “journalism.”

Dude. It’s an editorial. A culture piece. It’s not supposed to be objective. It’s fine to disagree with the content, of course, but it’s not “biased” - it’s an opinion piece. You guys get that, right? You get that clearly-marked opinion pieces are allowed to state an opinion, right? Sometimes I wonder if the whole #GamerGate thing isn’t just an enormous and elaborate piece of satirical performance art.
Umm.. Question then why the hell would you post all this stuff with advertisements on your opinion piece? I know it is an opinion. But why? Can’t you literally say. “Do not post on opinion pieces these types of advertisements?”

It is extremely poor taste.

IS that not dumb?

It is not wrong to criticize call of duty. As it is not wrong to defend it. But you should not advertise the game on your opinion piece.

It would be like doing the following:

"I hate you people who hate chocolate (Brought to you by dove chocolates)."

Really that seems like a satire?

K. You can believe that. But that is your opinion and that does not mean you have to force that opinion on others. Just look at and think would a professional journalist do this?

What is a journalist?

What makes a journalist a journalist?

How should a journalist act?

[snip]

It discounts your entire opinion if you have advertisements for the game you are clearly defending. It shows you be a fanboy and then your opinion falls at the seems.

[snip]
For the sake of my followers’ mental health, I cut out parts of this response comparing GamerGate to the civil rights movement, and talking about how feminists want to kill all the men so they can “rule” (no, I’m not kidding), and I’ll just respond to the stuff above.

I’ve talked about this before, but apparently people don’t understand the way media works. Advertising and editorial departments have nothing to do with each other. The people writing editorials have no control over which ads appear around their pieces, and advertisers (typically) do not get to dictate which content anchors their ads.

I get how you might view a positive opinion about Call of Duty (it’s not really as straightforward as that, but whatever) being put next to an ad for CoD as being hypocritical or inappropriate, but to get there would be to ignore the “church and state” separation between editorial and advertising which is a sacred cow in media. It also ignores that this is a bad photoshop job that has clearly moved things around to suit the narrative. It also ignores the fact that this shows an ad for Best Buy, not Call of Duty. And that whoever programmed the ad to run likely either did not know about the connection and couldn’t have changed it.

For someone who lectures so much on what proper journalism should be, you might want to think about and emulate the skills and province of truly great journalists: looking beyond what appears on the surface and using research and critical thinking to discover what’s really happening.

My response again

I think great journalism is removing yourself and becoming an observer.

(and You took me out of context)

I said some believe not all. I do not generalize. but they are a minority that do.

You misrepresented me in that way. If you are going to talk about my entire quote please have the entire quote. Misrepresenting facts when discussing with someone is a problem and is something that is a terrible thing to do. Journalists must take criticism to heart, they must improve their writing in order to be a journalist. They must be willing to observe both sides. See it from both sides look at it and deconstruct it. There is always that middle ground people who do not take both sides.

Should a journalist follow that path and be unintentionally biased? I knew it was photoshopped because I work with photoshop and thought it was bad. But I see sometimes certain occurances in games media or any media featuring games journalism.

Lets look up definitions then

"Journalism - the activity or profession of writing for newspapers or magazines or of broadcasting news on radio or television.

Journalism is gathering, processing, and dissemination of news and information related to the news to an audience. The word applies to both the method of inquiring for news and the literary style which is used to disseminate it.[1] [2]

The media through which journalism is conducted vary diversely to include content published via newspapers and magazines (print), television and radio (broadcast), and their digital versions published through digital media — news websites and applications.

In modern society, the news media is the chief purveyor of information and opinion about public affairs. Journalism, however, is not always confined to the news media or to news itself, as journalistic communication may find its way into broader forms of expression, including literature and cinema. In some nations, the news media is still controlled by government intervention, and is not fully an independent body.[3]

In a democratic society, however, access to free information plays a central role in creating a system of checks and balance, and in distributing power equally amongst governments, businesses, individuals, and other social entities. Access to verifiable information gathered by independent media sources, which adhere to journalistic standards, can also be of service to ordinary citizens, by empowering them with the tools they need in order to participate in the political process.” (sources used http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism, https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome-psyapi2&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS601US601&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8&q=journalism%20meaning)

Understanding journalism and being a journalist is a hard thing to do. I will not debate that. But being a good journalist means you must present news and opinion seperately. Which this author clearly did. (and thank you for point out the seperation line, as I had no idea that was a thing until you told me thank you)

But what we are seeing with these articles are not that.

I mean I looked on the twitter feed and I see people who aren’t attacking journalists I see people united under a banner. I mean you can believe all you want that notyourshield is just sock puppet accounts. But you also must be aware of the other side. (the journalistic side) And its blaring issue, being it is publishing articles like:

Gamers Are Dead (http://kotaku.com/we-might-be-witnessing-the-death-of-an-identity-1628203079) (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/08/the-death-of-the-gamers-and-the-women-who-killed-them/) (

Then we have articles written like this (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224400/Gamers_dont_have_to_be_your_audience_Gamers_are_over.php)

These are not news pieces. These are opinion. But why would you write these? What is the point? Other than to get a rise from your audience?

This is terrible journalism. The point of a journalist is to be thought provoking. To prove a point for the good of who you represent. This is not good. This is objectifying or exclusionary, this is attacking a large demographic. This is attacking the people who supported you.

This entire thing did not start with zoe quinn, she was the straw that broke the camels back. Along with the large censorship on Reddit. That is something I was angry over. Why can’t people talk about it? I really don’t care who sleeps with who as long as it doesn’t affect your career. I don’t think there is a giant conspiracy, but the way the news reacted, and generalizing that was insulting. That was stupid.

In all honesty the games media is not needed for gamers. This may be hard to hear, but as long as they continue to create articles like ‘gamers are dead’ is showing a vast immaturity.

You may threaten me as some people have done. And this is not from my side of the debate. People have threatened to destroy my lifestyle because I believe generalizing is a bad thing to do. There have been some very terrible things happening. And only acknowledging one side of the debate is willful ignorance. It shows that you did not take the time to research. To take a step back. and Think. What is right here. I am representing the people of this community. What do they want. Not what a select few want.

I do agree on many points. Women are misrepresented in gaming, But in the industry we have groups like The Fine Young Captalists, we have leading females in the industry. We just need better representations of women in games in terms of video game characters. We need to appeal to a larger audience and be better. To write better.

That is a good issue and one that I support. Adding more women to the industry will do wonders. I work with women every day. And I know they are skilled and well informed. And Must say that I enjoy my company because they are new viewpoint.

You took my example out of context by the way. Because I said originally that every movement has a crazy person in it. The minority of people who only job is to hurt other people. I do not condone this action. And neither should you. But that minority is on both sides. Address and act like journalists. And the gamers will flood to your side. Become more professional. Be something better. Learn and grow. And the community will follow suite.

But labeling everyone (A community that is) as Misogynists or nerds or insulting or flaming them or calling them worse than isis. Is a misunderstanding of great lengths and a sidestep in the wrong direction. That is not right. Leigh Alexander and several others need to stop, they need to apologize, even if they don’t know what for and say. We are sorry, you were right. We are sorry for insulting you. Now lets all get together and talk about the minority who have been insulting each other.

Anyway I respect the games media as someone in the industry as well, even as student I deal with you guys because I admire what you do. I admire Adam Sessler, Yahtzee Croshaw, and several others because of what they say. But you must be grown up and act professional in your daily lives. You can take a break. but becareful what you say on twitter.

I think we should all come from this and be rational. and Be good and follow ethical standards. On either side. I am neutral in this debate. I see both sides. Historically this is very similar to many movements. And a simple reading of history would show you that.

**VorpalBunny74**

Peregrine wrote:
VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Also Intel pulling their ads from Gamasutra is no small thing

You're right, it isn't small. It's ridiculously, almost inconceivably, TINY.

Ha ha sure, advertisers pulling their money out is no big deal. I believe you Peregrine.

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Also Intel pulling their ads from Gamasutra is no small thing

You're right, it isn't small. It's ridiculously, almost inconceivably, TINY.

Ha ha sure, advertisers pulling their money out is no big deal. I believe you Peregrine.

**Asherian Command**

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Also Intel pulling their ads from Gamasutra is no small thing

You're right, it isn't small. It's ridiculously, almost inconceivably, TINY.

Ha ha sure, advertisers pulling their money out is no big deal. I believe you Peregrine.

Why are you face palming?

Also I got an interesting conversation with a reviewer going and While I agree with him I think there should be standards they live up to.

stormwarriors2 said:

Though I agree on several points. I do have to say I do like having well manner debate or discussion on matters Thank you for talking to me, even if you did not believe me on the Fem-theist thing. But did you willfully paint me as someone who doesn't like women on purpose? Because that was not my intent. i said there are extremes in every movement. That is a true statement hopefully. Please know I am not harassing, just observing and giving criticisms of both sides.

No, I know this is not harassment. And no, I didn’t willfully misrepresent you. Cutting your response to just the topic at hand was a space (and headache) saving measure. People were perfectly free to look at your full post.

Here’s the thing: at the end of the day, I’m not sure our positions are actually all that opposing. It’s just that we seem to be talking about different things. You go on and on about what good journalism should be, and that’s fine. I probably agree with most of it. The problem is that you (and GG people) want to apply those journalistic concepts to all kinds of writing where they don’t belong.

It’s like we’re talking about painting. You link me to a bunch of articles about how commercial house painters should perform and behave, and while all of that may be perfectly true, it’s irrelevant because the larger conversation we’re talking about is individual, artistic paintings. The proper equipment or or techniques to paint a house are inappropriate standards when we’re talking about an artist working on a canvas. You may be right, but you’d be right about the wrong thing. Your discussion of journalism may be fine, but it’s irrelevant when we’re talking about reviews or opinion pieces, because they operate by different rules. See what I mean?

And just to clarify, since you used the word to refer to me several times, I am not a “journalist.” I’ve never once described myself that way, because it would be inaccurate. I write reviews. I write opinion pieces. I write criticism. I write personal essays. I do not write journalism. The fact that you would use that word to describe me only underscores that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what journalism is (and more importantly, what it is not).

I agree to a certain extent.

But I think posting articles like 'gamers are dead' are gross exaggerations and do far more harm than good.

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

Asherian Command wrote:
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Also Intel pulling their ads from Gamasutra is no small thing

You're right, it isn't small. It's ridiculously, almost inconceivably, TINY.

Ha ha sure, advertisers pulling their money out is no big deal. I believe you Peregrine.

Why are you face palming?

Because Peregrine.

**Ashiraya**

I find it very telling how none of you actually answered Peregrine's arguments.

**Compel**

To be honest, I don't really know if there is a way to answer his arguments without sounding like a pantomine.

"Oh no they won't!"
"Oh yes they will!"

**Ashiraya**

Well, of course. No one can predict the future. Still, it is no reason to use low tactics like

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Because Peregrine.

Respect for thine fellow Dakkaite?

Not that Edithae is the only one I think should look at that, of course. Just the most recent example.

**Peregrine**

Ok, I'm sick of hearing every single controversy have the "-gate" name attached by people who probably have no clue where the term came from. So, time to invent a new definition for the former "gamergate" side:

Gamer Justice Warrior (GJW): this is the gaming counterpart of the Social Justice Warrior (SJW). Like the SJW stereotype they are very concerned with winning online arguments and attacking anyone they perceive as The Enemy, but have little offline presence and seldom accomplish anything that requires more effort than making an angry blog post. Like SJWs, GJWs claim to be concerned with virtues like "fairness" and "free speech", but their actions demonstrate that these words are little more than a pretense to attack anyone who dares to say anything even the slightest bit offensive to them. When GJWs participate in an issue the debate is almost instantly derailed into keeping score in personal vendettas, and any legitimate issues that started the debate are quickly forgotten. Despite this lack of substance in their arguments GJWs can potentially force changes. Anyone on the wrong end of a GJW crusade will find themselves under constant attack by an angry mob and buried under accusations of "censorship" and "man-hating feminism". As a result community owners with less tolerance for pointless drama will often give in to the GJW's demands and at least put up a public appearance of agreeing with their cause.

From now on the term "gamergate" is abolished. Please use the appropriate term "GJW" to represent the enemies of the SJWs.

VorpalBunny74 wrote:
Ha ha sure, advertisers pulling their money out is no big deal. I believe you Peregrine.

Some advertisers pulling their money out of some websites for some time. So you cost a website some money, assuming they don't just fill that ad space with different ads. You've sent your message loud and clear, "don't say mean things about me or I'll destroy your income". But what constructive changes have you accomplished? The websites you've attacked are unlikely to change their minds, and even if they go bankrupt and shut down someone else will just replace them. And who knows, they might not even suffer any long-term loss from your "victory". It's nice if you want a trophy victory to brag about, but if you're concerned with meaningful change and not just keeping score in some stupid twitter vendetta then you've accomplished almost nothing.

And you haven't done anything about corruption, the supposed goal of your crusade, with this "victory".

**Ashiraya**

I must admit, GJW made me snerk.

I just hope it won't spark

**Kali**

Peregrine wrote:
I'm not implying anything, I'm stating it explicitly. As a member of the gaming community I think many, if not all, of those values should be endorsed by the community and by game developers.

Please explain in greater detail what exactly you think should change, I'd like to avoid straw-manning you.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Peregrine wrote:
seldom accomplish anything that requires more effort than making an angry blog post.

Well, they do angry email. Every time you post something here. Are you scared now?

**ZebioLizard2**

Ashiraya wrote:
I must admit, GJW made me snerk.

I just hope it won't spark

So what happened to

Respect for thine fellow Dakkaite?

I guess it only matters if it's on your side correct?

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/02/intel-pulls-ads-from-site-after-gamergate-boycott/

More concentration on Anita and Quinn, yet not once mentioning the constant attacks otherwise. Same old Same old.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

He has already explained it a bit.

Peregrine wrote:
Again, I'm talking about long-term changes. For example, has all this drama caused game publishers to change their policies on giving out early copies of games for reviewers to review? No? Well then guess what, reviewers are still going to have the same choice of "give this game a good score or risk losing access to the early copies I need to do my job" that they've had for the past 20+ years. And the trend of a major publisher being able to sell an empty box and get a "interesting potential but needs a bit of polish, 8/10" review will continue.

That would be a significant change.

**Mechanical Crow**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
seldom accomplish anything that requires more effort than making an angry blog post.

Well, they do angry email. Every time you post something here. Are you scared now?

Its better then impotently arguing here and filling the board with off topic banter. At least Gamergate is achieving something where as you 3 supporting rapists, fraudsters and racketeers.

**Peregrine**

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Respect for thine fellow Dakkaite?

I guess it only matters if it's on your side correct?

You do realize that I'm just mocking the people who throw around "SJW" labels, right?