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.
2014/10/02 23:37:54
Subject: Re:The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
You forgot the end of your sentence, I guess it was “are not”.
Impotently? What would you have us try to do exactly? What is our supposed objective?
[edit]Oh, yeah, I know: destroying video games because we hate men! Of course that is what I am trying to do. Just 4 more games and I will be level 25 in Strife, I hope they will open Ranked. Because I want to destroy video games![/edit]
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/02 23:43:11
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/10/02 23:38:10
Subject: Re:The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Mechanical Crow wrote: 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.
I guess you still have trouble understanding the concept of "both sides are wrong"? Are you aware that it is possible to criticize GJWs without simultaneously deciding that Zoe Quinn is a flawless saint to be worshiped and obeyed without question? I mean, I've pretty clearly stated that game journalism is the equivalent of celebrity gossip magazines, so I don't see how any reasonable person could interpret that as support for their offenses.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/02 23:39:35
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/02 23:45:34
Subject: Re:The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Peregrine wrote: 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.
Since Adam Baldwin coined the term, I'll give him a call and see if he's ok with changing it.
. . .
Hello, Adam? Some guy wants to change what we refer to GamerGate supporters.
. . .
I don't know, he might be serious.
. . .
Oh ok. Thanks Adam.
But what constructive changes have you accomplished?
Hopefully we've informed certain websites that actions have consequences. Calling your audience names is hilariously stupid. They can if they want (as indeed they did) but getting off scott free wasn't part of the deal.
Peregrine wrote: 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.
Pure "hopeful" speculation on your part.
Peregrine wrote: And who knows, they might not even suffer any long-term loss from your "victory".
Again, pure hopeful "speculation".
Peregrine wrote: 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.
It's another rung on the ladder of victory! That being, with luck, transparency and ethics in video "game" journalism.
Peregrine wrote: And you haven't done anything about corruption, the supposed goal of your crusade, with this "victory".
A corrupt website getting punished for anti-consumer practices isn't a "victory"?
VorpalBunny74 wrote: A corrupt website getting punished for anti-consumer practices isn't a "victory"?
If what you want is a corrupt website that also licks the boot of its consumer, then yeah, great move, awesome, gg!
If what you want is an honest, above corruption website that will never shy away from saying inconvenient truth to their audience… you got it all wrong, you will get the above instead! Awesome, great move, gg!
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/10/02 23:50:05
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
VorpalBunny74 wrote: A corrupt website getting punished for anti-consumer practices isn't a "victory"?
If what you want is a corrupt website that also licks the boot of its consumer, then yeah, great move, awesome, gg!
If what you want is an honest, above corruption website that will never shy away from saying inconvenient truth to their audience… you got it all wrong, you will get the above instead! Awesome, great move, gg!
Are you referring to Gamasutra as honest and above corruption? Oh you sweet summer child.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/02 23:52:46
VorpalBunny74 wrote: Hopefully we've informed certain websites that actions have consequences. Calling your audience names is hilariously stupid. They can if they want (as indeed they did) but getting off scott free wasn't part of the deal.
IOW, "don't say mean things about me or I'll punish you". What happened to talking about legitimate issues instead of stupid blog drama about who called who a mean name? If the huge brag-worthy victory of the GJWs is possibly punishing someone for being mean to them then I'd say the whole thing is a miserable failure.
Pure "hopeful" speculation on your part.
Well yes, that's the entire point I was trying to make: it's all speculation right now. It's way too early to declare victory just because one advertiser dropped their ads on one website.
It's another rung on the ladder of victory! That being, with luck, transparency and ethics in video "game" journalism.
But this has nothing to do with ethics and transparency, it's all about "THEY WERE MEAN TO ME".
A corrupt website getting punished for anti-consumer practices isn't a "victory"?
Saying mean things about GJWs is not corruption, nor is it really anti-consumer.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/02 23:56:24
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
VorpalBunny74 wrote: Are you referring to Gamasutra as honest and above corruption?
Nope, I am just laughing at the fact you did nothing to make it so. You just made sure it was also licking your boots on top of being corrupt. Good job. Congratulation. What are you going to do with your corrupt bootlicker now?
(And that is supposing you actually succeeded in making them into a boot-licker. Because that is all this angry fit of rage was about.)
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/10/03 00:02:23
Subject: Re:The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
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.
Okay, I've not posted in this thread for ages, because I couldn't be bothered dealing with your gak, but seriously, just stop. You have repeatedly called the opposition "rape supporters" or "supporting rapists" based on one particular person's skewy definition of rape, as if you just uttering those magic words means their arguments are suddenly invalid, because 'rape supporters'.
That is not how a discussion works.
You want to be taken seriously as a cause? Or at least a slight bit more seriously than the 'SJWs' that you vilify so much? Then stop calling everyone that disagrees with you a fething rape supporter!
Do you seriously think that you're going to open up a polite discourse that might lead to positive changes in the gaming industry when your response to people disagreeing with you is to call them a rape supporter?
The sheer, unbridled smugness exuding from your posts is even irritating me, and I actually agree with a good portion of the GamerGate argument. I can't imagine how obnoxious it comes across as to someone who disagrees with you, or that's on the fence.
Going "Well nyuh nyuh, I'm better than you" every time Peregrine posts helps the advancement of gaming or gaming journalism not one iota, so please, for the sake of the moral high ground you seem so keen to obtain, just stop.
All of you. And I am talking to all of you. Be respectful. Follow dakka rules.... Now. If this thread descends any further... .*sigh*
I was taking a nap for an hour and I come back to this shesh.
Now to get back on topic.
Also Peregrine that post about GJW is kind of stupid and does not help your cause. Mechanical Crow: Please refrain from that language and calling the otherside as rapist supporters. They aren't. Zoe Quinn is Deplorable but she is not a primary concern of Gamer Gate.
#GamerGate: What do you want? Published on Tuesday, September 30, 2014 By Frogboy In PC Gaming Last week I wrote about the Escalation of #GamerGate. I recommended that advocates of #GamerGate come up with a set of objectives while momentum was in their favor.
A Recap For the uninitiated, #GamerGate is a schism that has formed between the enthusiast gaming press and core gamers. The schism was largely the result of the gaming media allowing their platforms to be utilized by the more radical elements within their ranks to denigrate core gamers as “dead” and “nerds” and “misogynists” in response to a handful of gamers targeting an outspoken feminist game developer who they believed had received unmerited coverage due to her personal relationships with the gaming press.
#Gamergate was coined by Adam Baldwin in response to the gaming media’s aggressive stance towards gamers who expressed their concerns regarding what they believed to be inappropriate collusion between developers and journalists and now represents those who passionately want to see changes in the way the gaming media approaches its subjects.
Jack Thompson II The situation reminds me of when activist lawyer, Jack Thompson argued against violence in video games. Back then, the enthusiast gaming press and core gamers ridiculed Thompson’s arguments and at times, targeted him with substantial harassment. Eventually his movement petered out and everything went back to normal.
This time, the crusade against core gaming is being led by self-identified “social justice” activists who believe that video games are inherently hostile to women, minorities, etc. Core gamers have reacted the same as they did in 2003 with open ridicule and at times, substantial harassment of their foes. However, this time, the enthusiast press decided to brand core gamers as “misogynists” on the basis that the targets of ridicule and harassment are feminists instead of a male lawyer.
Many core gamers believe that the reason the gaming media has been backing this agenda is because unlike in 2003, they are in bed with the other side financially, politically and sometimes literally. Meanwhile, some in the enthusiast press think that the vocal elements #gamergate are just a bunch of misogynistic lunatics.
What do you want out of this? I suggested that the #GamerGate advocates come up with 5 objectives to rally around. With a week of reflection, I’m not sure that’s really a good idea as it would likely just splinter those who support #Gamergate into smaller factions.Nevertheless, a lot of interesting suggestions were made.
Below are some representations of the objectives people believe #gamergate should have
Insist on a full disclosure of relationships (Financial, personal, or otherwise) between the developer/publisher and journalist/publication. Fair and professional representation of all sides during debate (Including twitter and other social media directly related to a journalists writing persona) without censorship of opposing opinions. Where disagreement over facts is present both sides should be represented with relevant proof where available. Fact checking of all articles. Do not report on issues like harassment and bomb threats without first checking the story is real, then also read into all parties involved and relay histories of similar incidents if a pattern is present. Proper representation of gaming's diverse multi-cultural elements. Don't blame 'straight, white, males' for everything. It's extremely unprofessional and deeply offensive. A full apology from all involved in Twitter campaigns, 'gamers are dead' articles, and other anti-GG attacks. A end to journalist collusion in regards to the omission of stories that do not fit in with ideology Report on what games are like, not what they are lacking in terms of perceived social justice.
Quit censoring topics based on your personal political biases. If you have a stated policy, stick to that. Don’t pull the rug out because your ideology is losing the debate.
Those sites that published articles attacking gamers should publish an editorial apologizing for those attacks.
Stop game sites from injecting a political agenda into content, especially things like reviews or interviews. Opinion pieces are fine as long as they are clearly marked as opinion and the comments left open so that respectful, dissenting points of can be heard.
Game sites should abandon articles that character assassinate individuals or groups that are related to the gaming industry.
The practice of blackballing developers for the kind of games they make, their political opinion or something they might have said needs to stop, everyone should be given a fair chance.
Game Sites should have an ethics policy which is easy to find and which clearly lays out policies regarding journalistic standards.
Game sites should post a complete renunciation of the claim that Gamergate was "based in misogyny and harassment".
Cut off all ties with Silverstring media as well as Patreon support for those who work with/use it.
Force the removal of the most egregious actors in the gaming press.
Game Magazines and sites need a stated, public policy regarding how they define a conflict of interest. For instance, a conflict of interest is may be defined as any romantic, sexual, or platonic relationship; additionally, any economic relationships through services such as Patreon or Kickstarter.
Censorship is not acceptable. We expect to be able to discuss our grievances with your websites openly, so long as the conversation is polite and respectful.
All news articles must meet the Ms. Walters standards- at MINIMUM two reasonably unbiased sources, with at least one from both sides, must be present. If two sources cannot be found, this must be clearly stated in the article.
If your website believes in advocating for a political cause, be open about it.
Full disclosure on relationship of journalist and game developer. IE Patreon, Kick Starter, Friend, Lover, Roommate, where did you get the game, etc.
This is by no means a comprehensive list.
Reality vs. Fantasy A lot of the objectives, demands and hopes I read are fantasy. Demands without leverage are just a form of groveling. Only objectives that the #gamergate proponents can enforce are, in my opinion, realistic.
I’m friends with a lot of people in the gaming media. I know they’re good people. They’re also honest, trustworthy and full of integrity. They are also convinced that #gamergate is a thinly veiled front to attack women in gaming. I think they’re wrong. Terribly wrong. But they will not be convinced otherwise.
I’m also friends with a lot of game developers. And most of them have been horrified by what they see as the self-destruction of the enthusiast press when it comes to their relationship with their most loyal supporters. Most game developers I’ve talked to about this issue cannot fathom why the gaming press would be attacking their own readership.
As one fairly well known game developer said to me last week, “What’s really odd is that some of these guys forget that when Cracked or whatever gets back to their usual beat, the gaming press still has to live with these guys [the hard core gamers that make up a large % of the daily page views of these game sites]”.
What I’d like to see the gaming media do I’m just an old game developer. So I might as well wish for it to rain donuts. Mind you, I cringe even reading the below points because I hate preachiness and anything that seems coercive. That said, I think the below points would be helpful to them.
Professionalism. Create a policy based on the Society of Professional Journalists. Have your writers and freelancers read it and sign it before accepting work from them. This would cover disclosures of excessive personal or financial relationships between the writer and the subject. Transparency and Fairness. Create a mission statement for your site and put it in the about area. This would be useful both for readers and those who would submit content to your magazine/site. Self-Enforcement. Encourage your editors to be on the look out for writers who are trying to pass their political agenda as “news”. Don’t let your platform be used to advocate some cause that deviates from the general mission of site. House Cleaning. Discourage or eliminate moderators/editors who allow personal political biases to determine what topics are allowed on your forums/website. (For example if you have a policy against topics that might encourage “harassment of game developers” then make sure it’s enforced equally and not just game developers who you politically agree with.) What I’d like to see #Gamergate do Vigilance. Support and encourage those maintaining vigilance, providing constructive criticism and doing due diligence on how games are covered. Resistance. Continue to resist those who would wrongly believe inclusion means one group has to “die”. This means using various channels to disseminate information. Don’t allow your hobby to be turned into “Hobby+” Inclusiveness. Vigorously discourage any repeat of the August 28 “Gamers are dead” series of articles by vigorously reminding the media that you’re not going anywhere. Gamers want everyone to play games. Support journalists who support actual inclusiveness – you want more people playing games not just “the correct” people. Support. Actively support and defend those who are being marginalized for purely political reasons.
Natural Allies As a reminder: The gaming media’s natural purpose is to be the advocate of the gamer. The media is supposed to be the watchdog making sure we game developers aren’t screwing over gamers. I feel like we’re in this bizarro situation where the game developers are the ones having to defend gamers from the media. It’s backwards. Stop it.
Gamers, by definition, want to play games. They want games to be reviewed based on how fun the reviewer thinks the game will be to their audience. They don’t care what the reviewer’s personal political hang ups are. Game sites aren't supposed to be a therapy couch for narcissism. I have lots of opinions on life too but I don’t inject them into my games. Maybe it’s easier for me to keep my whacko views out of my games because the financial punishment would be swift and unmistakable. Either way, knock it off.
What’s next I don’t think #gamergate will be going away any time soon. Given the general unpleasantness of the whole affair, I think editors and journalists in general will be more self-aware of their relationships and take more care in what gets published in the future. Only time will tell.
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.
Okay, I've not posted in this thread for ages, because I couldn't be bothered dealing with your gak, but seriously, just stop. You have repeatedly called the opposition "rape supporters" or "supporting rapists" based on one particular person's skewy definition of rape, as if you just uttering those magic words means their arguments are suddenly invalid, because 'rape supporters'.
That is not how a discussion works.
You want to be taken seriously as a cause? Or at least a slight bit more seriously than the 'SJWs' that you vilify so much? Then stop calling everyone that disagrees with you a fething rape supporter!
Do you seriously think that you're going to open up a polite discourse that might lead to positive changes in the gaming industry when your response to people disagreeing with you is to call them a rape supporter?
The sheer, unbridled smugness exuding from your posts is even irritating me, and I actually agree with a good portion of the GamerGate argument. I can't imagine how obnoxious it comes across as to someone who disagrees with you, or that's on the fence.
Going "Well nyuh nyuh, I'm better than you" every time Peregrine posts helps the advancement of gaming or gaming journalism not one iota, so please, for the sake of the moral high ground you seem so keen to obtain, just stop.
Yeah, I gotta agree here. You need to stop calling the 'other side' rape supporters. That's embracing the worst aspects of their tactics. Now fraudsters and racketeers I can get behind.
2014/10/03 00:43:44
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: Also Peregrine that post about GJW is kind of stupid and does not help your cause.
So let me get this straight: calling people you disagree with SJWs is ok and you'll gladly present articles containing "SJW" accusations as legitimate sources, but applying the same stereotype to you is "kind of stupid" and "doesn't help my cause"?
Oh good, more complaining about "censorship" (there is none) and insisting that the real problem has very little to do with corruption and is almost entirely about GJWs not getting their ideas published frequently and prominently enough. Oh, and a little bonus nonsense about "keeping politics out of it" while overlooking the fact that saying "everything is ok right now" is also a political position.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/03 00:53:48
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: Also Peregrine that post about GJW is kind of stupid and does not help your cause.
So let me get this straight: calling people you disagree with SJWs is ok and you'll gladly present articles containing "SJW" accusations as legitimate sources, but applying the same stereotype to you is "kind of stupid" and "doesn't help my cause"?
Oh good, more complaining about "censorship" (there is none) and insisting that the real problem has very little to do with corruption and is almost entirely about GJWs not getting their ideas published frequently and prominently enough. Oh, and a little bonus nonsense about "keeping politics out of it" while overlooking the fact that saying "everything is ok right now" is also a political position.
Did you willfully ignore what this article said? Are you that willing to throw it away because you think it has nothing to do with corruption this is a game developer talking about the issue.
And you are willing to throw it to the side because it does not fit your narrative of what is going on.
Please tell me how are you able to throw it to the side.
A good reporter or journalist is an observer and does not take sides.
So let me get this straight: calling people you disagree with SJWs is ok and you'll gladly present articles containing "SJW" accusations as legitimate sources, but applying the same stereotype to you is "kind of stupid" and "doesn't help my cause"?
There is nothing for pushing for social justice. But being a proponent and pushing it down peoples throats because you are offended by it is something else entirely.
But again I am talking to you who is writing their own narrative for the scene.
And only believe what they write as fact and glory above all. And that their opinion is above all others.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/03 00:55:14
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/03 00:55:29
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Okay guys, an acronym was floated, agree or disagree with it, please return to discussing what this thread is about. You may certainly use the term "Gamergate" if you wish (it's in the thread title and is rather what this thread is about, after all!).
If you don't wish to use it, please agree to disagree at this point and move on to discussing the actual topic at hand, rather than what to call it.
Further off-topic posts will, as always, result in the appropriate warnings / etc.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/03 00:57:40
2014/10/03 01:00:44
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
The game industry as been ablaze for, really, the last couple of years about misogyny within its ranks. This really came to a head in the past couple weeks when an outspoken “indie” game developer was accused of some sordid activities in exchange for media coverage.
Online culture has a serious toxicity problem. It gets worse every year. Here are 3 things that are driving it:
#1 The tabloidiziation of the gaming media.
First, I want to emphasize that the gaming media isn’t some monolithic thing. There are a lot of good publications and journalists in the game industry. But at the same time, they, like you, know who and what I’m referring to, are often appalled by them, so I think they, and you, will forgive me if I simply describe the usual suspects as “the gaming media”.
It’s not just that the gaming media publicizes every tawdry rumor or speculation about the individuals involved in making games. It’s that they actively take sides and drive the narrative. This is extremely divisive and thus creates a constituency of people waiting “their turn” to air their grievances.
The gaming media likes to create heroes, villains and victims. I’ve been portrayed as all 3 even though I’ve never been any of the 3:
I was a “hero” because I refused to put copy protection on our games. But I wasn’t really a hero. I believed that we would generate more sales by not inconveniencing our customers.
I was a “villain” because I was accused of “sexually harassing” our marketing manager. But I wasn’t really a villain. I hadn’t actually done anything beyond sending a mean email to an insubordinate employee who happened to be female (and she later apologized publicly).
I was a “victim” when Demigod got released on Good Friday by GameStop and our lack of copy protection allowed hundreds of thousands of people to jam up our servers keeping people from playing. But I wasn’t really a victim because if I had planned better, we would have had a more robust multiplayer infrastructure up before release.
The problem is that the gaming media gets more hits from demonizing game makers which makes their audience angry and causes them to lash out at the appointed villain. So contextless articles are written designed to make you hate someone, usually people that the article writer already has a problem with. Those articles then live on via search engines perpetuating people being mad and going after the appointed villain. Toxicity is created, spread and maintained.
This is easy to demonstrate. Right now, Google my name. “Brad Wardell”.
On Google, you’ll find my Wiki entry, twitter and my blogs and probably linked in. But right after that? Slime.
Note that I’ve been in the tech/game industry for over 20 years. I’ve done a lot of stuff in that 20 years ranging from writing the first commercial 32bit computer game to designing Start8.
Now, Google search someone the media has exceptional…sympathy for. Go ahead. Look at the top entries there. Compare.
For me, the really frustrating parts is how out of context and biased the actual coverage can get depending on what is being covered. The media and the subsequent trolls loved to take snippets or something without any curiosity of the larger context (such as incredibly insubordinate comments from someone – “you need to make an appointment with me before coming to my office area”) in order to create the narrative they want to incite their readership.
The point is, the gaming media is perfectly happy to profit from spreading toxicity into Internet culture. The only difference now is that people are able to push back against the narratives being foisted.
#2 Professional Victims
The professional victim is an individual who takes advantage of good hearted people. This is particularly the case in the game industry. If someone’s media coverage / social media influence greatly outstrips their actual accomplishments, they might be a professional victim.
I’ve been getting death threats and online flames since the beginning. I didn’t go around complaining about it because, like most people, I know that the world is full of jerks and idiots and if they’ve heard of you, they will sometimes target you. The professional victim, by contrast, will convert trolling into media gold which just so happens to get coverage for their new game or new project.
The professional victim is purposely trying to ruffle feathers and then gain exposer for their project by the outpouring of abuse they take. But only some people are allowed to be victims. If some gruff man were to start critiquing the fashion industry, any complaints he had regarding the “harassment” he received due to the inevitable insults directed his way would be ignored.
Professional victims rely on the fact that we don’t condemn intolerance and abuse universally. Because of that, like issue #1, the culture becomes more divisive, more toxic. When people feel they haven’t gotten a fair shake or that their beliefs are being misrepresented, they get angry.
Lastly, a reminder: Trolls customize their insults just for you. They will pick what they think will upset you the most and use that. If you wear your grievances on your sleeve then it’s just that much easier.
#3 Unaccountability
The typical stereotype of the online “troll” is that they’re some kid. But the nastiest of the trolls tend to actually be people who actually work IN THE INDUSTRY (or close to it) posting anonymously.
Sometimes they post as themselves but because they have the correct “politics” they get a pass. One of the worst trolls I’ve had to deal with was the founding editor of Kotaku. He even made a YouTube video comparing me to Hitler (it’s still up if you search for it). Imagine if the former editor in chief of Kotaku posted a video comparing a female game developer with Hitler. What do you imagine the coverage would be? What does that tell you about the attitudes of some people in “activist” media?
The fact that Twitter and YouTube still allow anonymity for their users is [A] Not surprising but [B] a major reason why we have so much gak on the Internet. People are a lot more reasonable when they are posting as “themselves”.
No easy answers
I wish there was an easy answer. In a click-bait driven Internet, toxicity sells. I suspect we’ll be forced to live with that. But people don’t have to sit back like sheep and be manipulated by it. They can push back when some “journalist” posts a hit piece and call out hypocrisy on those who complain about “harassment” when in fact they’re part of the culture that cultivates and profits from it. In the meantime, grow a thick skin and try not to let it affect you.
So that’s my 2 cents anyway for what it’s worth.
TL;DR version:
The tabloid parts of the gaming media gak out a lot of toxicity that lives on forever via search engines. Unaccountable trolls read up on this and then perpetuate the original toxicity by keeping it alive, thus perpetuating the cycle. Meanwhile some cynical people capitalize on the gaming media bias to get career boosting publicity despite their meager real world accomplishments.
Please note this is a view from a game developer.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/03 01:06:10
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: Did you willfully ignore what this article said? Are you that willing to throw it away because you think it has nothing to do with corruption this is a game developer talking about the issue.
I read the article, and I saw a bunch of whining about "censorship" that isn't censorship, and demands for "fairness" as if everyone is obligated to help other people publish their ideas. The author says very little about corruption, and their biggest problem seems to be that SJWs get to have an opinion and nobody wants to listen to the poor oppressed GJWs.
Please tell me how are you able to throw it to the side.
Like this:
*picks up the article and throws it to the side*
A good reporter or journalist is an observer and does not take sides.
And again you're under the assumption that game journalism is about Real Serious Journalism and Finding The Truth. It isn't. It's a bunch of people who have managed to turn writing about their favorite toys into a paying job.
Also, taking sides is the entire point of most game writing! If you read a review of a game you don't want a listing of neutral facts like the price and system requirements, you want to know the critic's opinion of it. And that means taking a side and saying X is good/bad. A world in which game journalism is dominated by wikipedia-style forced "neutrality"* would be a world in which game journalism is too boring for anyone to bother reading it.
*Which very often consists of creating an obligation to give equal time to raving lunatics on issues that are not even close to being up for debate.
There is nothing for pushing for social justice. But being a proponent and pushing it down peoples throats because you are offended by it is something else entirely.
IOW, "calling my enemies SJWs is ok, but don't you dare apply a similar label to me". If all the SJWs are so evil for "pushing it down peoples' throats" then how exactly do you justify things like trying to punish websites that say mean things about gamers? That sounds an awful lot like trying to push your GJW agenda down their throats.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/03 01:10:59
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Peregrine wrote: IOW, "don't say mean things about me or I'll punish you". What happened to talking about legitimate issues instead of stupid blog drama about who called who a mean name? If the huge brag-worthy victory of the GJWs is possibly punishing someone for being mean to them then I'd say the whole thing is a miserable failure.
Yes, if you insult me as a customer, I will not consumer your product. Pretty basic stuff. They aren't "entitled" to our business. Do you think they should be?
Well yes, that's the entire point I was trying to make: it's all speculation right now. It's way too early to declare victory just because one advertiser dropped their ads on one website.
I declared a minor victory, not an overall victory. This geek tragedy has a long way to go
But this has nothing to do with ethics and transparency, it's all about "THEY WERE MEAN TO ME".
Al Capone was brought down by tax evasion
Saying mean things about GJWs is not corruption, nor is it really anti-consumer.
Indeed, insulting the customer is a brand new marketing technique
VorpalBunny74 wrote: Are you referring to Gamasutra as honest and above corruption?
Nope, I am just laughing at the fact you did nothing to make it so. You just made sure it was also licking your boots on top of being corrupt. Good job. Congratulation. What are you going to do with your corrupt bootlicker now?
(And that is supposing you actually succeeded in making them into a boot-licker. Because that is all this angry fit of rage was about.)
Sorry I forgot websites only have a binary state between insulting and pandering. I was hoping for more options. Why are you trying to take options away Hybrid?
Which is a good point, but it applies just as well to both sides. Much of the GJW crusade is nothing more than tabloidization and a desire to make the "villain" pay for being mean to the heroic GJWs. And let's not forget that the whole thing started by singling out specific people as "villains" after decades of the whole industry doing the exact same things without comment.
#2 Professional Victims
And this is just impressive irony. "Look what a martyr I am, quietly suffering harassment instead of being a professional victim". Perhaps he should consider the fact that he has the privilege of ignoring the occasional idiot making death threats, while women tend to face more threads and harassment in general and be much more vulnerable to someone deciding to take their violence offline? Or maybe he should think about how his silence and saying "it's no big deal" encourages harassment, while someone posting their harassment and saying "this is not ok" might actually get people to change?
#3 Unaccountability
Again, something that applies equally well to GJWs. Or does anyone really think that the people harassing "SJWs" would be doing it if their employers/family/etc could see it under their real name?
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/03 01:16:20
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
I read the article, and I saw a bunch of whining about "censorship" that isn't censorship, and demands for "fairness" as if everyone is obligated to help other people publish their ideas. The author says very little about corruption, and their biggest problem seems to be that SJWs get to have an opinion and nobody wants to listen to the poor oppressed GJWs.
I read it more inciteful As funny thing that had very little to do what he was talking about he was objective and talked about and gave examples and you know gave reasoning as to why it is a good cause. The very fact you said that tells volumes that you didn't read the full article.
And again you're under the assumption that game journalism is about Real Serious Journalism and Finding The Truth. It isn't. It's a bunch of people who have managed to turn writing about their favorite toys into a paying job.
Also, taking sides is the entire point of most game writing! If you read a review of a game you don't want a listing of neutral facts like the price and system requirements, you want to know the critic's opinion of it. And that means taking a side and saying X is good/bad. A world in which game journalism is dominated by wikipedia-style forced "neutrality"* would be a world in which game journalism is too boring for anyone to bother reading it.
*Which very often consists of creating an obligation to give equal time to raving lunatics on issues that are not even close to being up for debate.
Because they use the word journalism which means they have to follow the critera for journalism or being a journalist the fact that you don't know that is pricely what gamers want. They want it to be informative. If you want a review to cover it in your opinion then make an opinion section in your review. Talk about the game and what you liked about it.
Otherwise review it and see what it takes to run the darn thing. The fact that some places actually lack that is stupid.
If you want to talk about the game write and editorial alongside it that is more personal.
Which is a good point, but it applies just as well to both sides. Much of the GJW crusade is nothing more than tabloidization and a desire to make the "villain" pay for being mean to the heroic GJWs. And let's not forget that the whole thing started by singling out specific people as "villains" after decades of the whole industry doing the exact same things without comment.
We were told not to use that term at all Peregrine.
Its called being good to your consumer and kind to them. Like you know anything about being kind as you have clearly shown.
And this is just impressive irony. "Look what a martyr I am, quietly suffering harassment instead of being a professional victim". Perhaps he should consider the fact that he has the privilege of ignoring the occasional idiot making death threats, while women tend to face more threads and harassment in general and be much more vulnerable to someone deciding to take their violence offline? Or maybe he should think about how his silence and saying "it's no big deal" encourages harassment, while someone posting their harassment and saying "this is not ok" might actually get people to change?
Yes but this time the journalists use it for their own benefit. We don't have people who are making money from being a professional victim. Acting groups of people and then using their cause to benefit themselves. I.E. Zoe Quinn and Antia Sarkessan.
The fact that you are saying gamers played the professional victim card is a gross stupidity on your part. Because I have yet to see a gamer that for personal benefit used their victimization as means for monetary gain and turning everyone to DDOS or attack a group of people.
When the other side has done that quite often. With attacking the gamers and labelling them and come crying and start massing up emails and such saying how can we do this. "Lets play the victim card peeps!" And then they do and other journalists join in because they want to protect their business partners or friends. Or white knighting as the term goes.
Again, something that applies equally well to GJWs. Or does anyone really think that the people harassing "SJWs" would be doing it if their employers/family/etc could see it under their real name?
Well, if you want accountablility you need to list all things that you have done and say yes we did that. And there has been from the gamergate side. There have been people who attack the trolls and silence their voice because they thing it is undermining the movement. And that is a good thing. They label the trolls and get rid of them, because we don't want those types of people in our community.
The years of trolling are over.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/03 01:22:05
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/03 01:16:33
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
VorpalBunny74 wrote: Yes, if you insult me as a customer, I will not consumer your product. Pretty basic stuff. They aren't "entitled" to our business. Do you think they should be?
Of course that's basic, and obviously they're not entitled to GJW business if GJWs decide to stop buying. But that's not some noble ideological point being made, it's just petty drama about who called who a mean name. If that's the final goal of the GJW crusade then that's a pretty big disappointment.
Indeed, insulting the customer is a brand new marketing technique
You're making the assumption that GJWs are the target customers. Perhaps the sites in question just decided that SJWs were a more profitable market?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Asherian Command wrote: I read it more inciteful As funny thing that had very little to do what he was talking about he was objective and talked about and gave examples and you know gave reasoning as to why it is a good cause. The very fact you said that tells volumes that you didn't read the full article.
IOW, "you disagree with me about this article, you didn't read it".
Because they use the word journalism which means they have to follow the critera for journalism or being a journalist
According to who?
the fact that you don't know that is pricely what gamers want.
Really? As a gamer I think I have a pretty good idea what I want, and it has nothing to do with your hypothetical world of treating toy reviews as Serious Ethical Journalism.
They want it to be informative. If you want a review to cover it in your opinion then make an opinion section in your review. Talk about the game and what you liked about it.
EVERY REVIEW IS AN OPINION.
Seriously, why is this so hard for you to understand? The entire point of a review is to find a critic that likes the same things you like, and then see what their opinion of a new product is. If they liked it then you probably will too, and you should buy it. If they don't like it then their review will probably give you reasons not to buy it. Trying to take that opinion factor out of the review makes it absolutely useless to the reader, since it no longer provides any information that you can't get from the back of the box.
Otherwise review it and see what it takes to run the darn thing.
Which is boring. I have zero interest in reading a "review" that consists of nothing more than neutral facts like what FPS the author got on their PC at what detail settings.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/03 01:21:22
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/03 01:26:48
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
According to the definition of the word by Merriam
Really? As a gamer I think I have a pretty good idea what I want, and it has nothing to do with your hypothetical world of treating toy reviews as Serious Ethical Journalism.
The fact you compared video games to toys is pricely why you are not knowledgable in these events.
IOW, "you disagree with me about this article, you didn't read it".
No because you proved to me that you didn't read it all. You didn't read all the articles I have posted. And you have yet to articulate it.
As you have been known to take a position and not do very well.
EVERY REVIEW IS AN OPINION.
Seriously, why is this so hard for you to understand? The entire point of a review is to find a critic that likes the same things you like, and then see what their opinion of a new product is. If they liked it then you probably will too, and you should buy it. If they don't like it then their review will probably give you reasons not to buy it. Trying to take that opinion factor out of the review makes it absolutely useless to the reader, since it no longer provides any information that you can't get from the back of the box.
Not all the time. A review does not always have to be an opinion.
It doesn't always have to be an opinionated piece.
Which is boring. I have zero interest in reading a "review" that consists of nothing more than neutral facts like what FPS the author got on their PC at what detail settings.
Knowing that is alot of information. Knowing the specs required to play the game, And allowing the gamers to know exactly if there is performance issues or bugs that they encountered in the game.
You're making the assumption that GJWs are the target customers. Perhaps the sites in question just decided that SJWs were a more profitable market?
Hahaha Yes the group of 90 people is more profitable than the 200,000 people.
Yep totally makes sense.
Of course that's basic, and obviously they're not entitled to GJW business if GJWs decide to stop buying. But that's not some noble ideological point being made, it's just petty drama about who called who a mean name. If that's the final goal of the GJW crusade then that's a pretty big disappointment.
you are sounding like a parody of yourself now. Please stop before I can't stop laughing too hard at your opinions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/03 01:28:02
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/03 01:26:53
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
PJW wrote: Of course that's basic, and obviously they're not entitled to GJW business if GJWs decide to stop buying. But that's not some noble ideological point being made, it's just petty drama about who called who a mean name. If that's the final goal of the GJW crusade then that's a pretty big disappointment.
It's a good thing that's not the final goal of GamerGate then!
You're making the assumption that GJWs are the target customers. Perhaps the sites in question just decided that SJWs were a more profitable market?
I guess I am assuming that gamers are the target customers of video game websites. If they want to switch to other audiences, they are free to do so, and not be supported by their previous audience. If they succeed, more power to them.
VorpalBunny74 wrote: It's a good thing that's not the final goal of GamerGate then!
Then why are you presenting it as such an important "victory"?
I guess I am assuming that gamers are the target customers of video game websites. If they want to switch to other audiences, they are free to do so, and not be supported by their previous audience. If they succeed, more power to them.
GJWs =/= all gamers.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/03 01:31:00
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
I guess I am assuming that gamers are the target customers of video game websites. If they want to switch to other audiences, they are free to do so, and not be supported by their previous audience. If they succeed, more power to them.
GJWs =/= all gamers.
Yet you said in your statement they were catering towards SJWs. So with that frame of logic they were not catering to gamers in anyway.
And so we had no context clues to point to it being gamers as well.
We can't read your mind mate.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/03 01:31:29
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/03 01:33:29
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: Yet you said in your statement they were catering towards SJWs. So with that frame of logic they were not catering to gamers in anyway.
Are you aware that some of the people you call "SJWs" are also gamers?
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/03 01:36:07
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: Yet you said in your statement they were catering towards SJWs. So with that frame of logic they were not catering to gamers in anyway.
Are you aware that some of the people you call "SJWs" are also gamers?
Did you know that is a minority... And you are trying to drag this conversation off topic? Its a minority in gaming and it is not a good thing. The fact you keep calling gamers apart of gamer gate GJWs is just showing how much of a childish argument you are proposing. You are doing the. "Oh well if they call me this, then I call them this." Type of argument. Real mature Peregrine. real Mature.
So, About Them Gamers and Their Silly Games! What is a man? Well, the answer is quite obvious that he is naught but a pile of secrets.
However, what about a gamer? The answer to that question is... well, rather nebulous. Shrouded in confusion from ignorance, fear, or simple variance of opinion. And indeed, there are many opinions on the idea, ranging from the valid and informed to the uneducated, ignorant, and wildly, accusingly untrue.
Many people who look at facts see gamers by what news outlets or scientific studies show them. I mean, gamers simply... play games. Right? If you own a smartphone and play simple little puzzle games involving the repeated destruction of edible delights, does that make you a gamer? Statistically, people who play games are some of the brightest people in the world. We might be a little socially awkward once in a while, but we can't all roll a natural 18 charisma. Many of us are incredibly artistic and uniquely intelligent. People who play games are businessmen, musicians, politicians, scientists, artists... The list goes on. Still, people that play games, whether they be World of Warcraft, Minecraft, or whatever -craft you call your poison--are they gamers? What is it that makes a person truly a 'gamer'?
To me, and many others, a more philosophical approach seems appropriate. Being a gamer isn't about something you do. It's about who you are. Gaming is something that defines you as a person. Many people like me grew up playing games, but how or when do you transition from playing games to being a gamer? Anyone with an intelligent answer would easily be able to turn heads and make people quietly utter, "Clever girl."
Again... it's rather difficult to answer. Perhaps there is no answer; people are allowed to have their own opinions. One of my friends said today that it's about playing games and enjoying them as your escape from the real world. Another told me she played games to be social, to enjoy time with her friends. Personally, I believe that it's not about playing games, but more simply about loving them, living them; whether you play them, write about them, talk about them, design them, or take some inspiration from them, being enthused about games... being enthralled by the artistic style, the composition of the music, the mechanical workings of games. That's what it's about.
There is no doubt in anybody's mind, either, that games are by their very nature artistic creations; some of the most wonderfully artistic things in this world are games. Many similarities exist between classical art and games: some are created by true geniuses of the medium, people tend to disagree on which ones are better than others and rather enjoy their personal tastes, and some go misunderstood, despite the inner beauty.
What makes art, though? Is it definable by some sort of mechanical understanding, or some solid quantity or quality? Absolutely not. Anything and everything has an effect on a final product. Much the same can be said of video games; everything has an effect on video games. Simple things like time, money, and tools available, complex and unquantifiable things like personal beliefs and opinions, and even unexpected things like levels of experience...
Ubisoft's Rayman, for example. He doesn't have arms or legs simply because the development team had difficulty rendering limbs; when removed, they experimented with ideas such as firing fists across the screen, and he eventually became their famous flagship persona, even stretching his limbless hands out of the gaming world to become the mascot for the French soccer team in the World Cup.
Earthworm Jim, too. Whether it was the silly humor, the unique art style, or the laughable and lovable characters, everyone's favorite cow-loving worm still turns a few heads whenever he shouts out "GROOVY!" with a big, goofy smile on his face. Did you know his entire universe was designed by a rabid creationist? Doug TenNapel, indeed, is a Christian and a conservative, and his views on gay marriage might make not make liberals or moderates say "Way Cool!" However, as opinionated as Doug is, Jim isn't; Doug's personal beliefs undoubtedly influenced every artistic design choice he's made in his games, but the games aren't designed around pushing an agenda. While Professor Monkey-for-a-Head is designed around an old high school biology teacher discussing evolution, the beliefs and opinions instead enrich the designs, improving the narrative and providing players with much stronger immersion.
Now, does it matter to some how a developer or journalist performs their job? Do the personal lives and beliefs of a person affect how the public views their works of art? Absolutely. Should it matter? Not necessarily. It's always up to a person's opinion, and I certainly won't cast the first stone. Someone's personal beliefs and opinions are theirs and theirs alone; while they may derive inspiration from it, it does not necessarily mean their art demands attention to that belief. Some people who feel strongly enough about another person's beliefs, however, will indeed be biased in regards to their work, whether for or against. A game or a piece of art should only be judged based on its own merits, or by the merits of the universe it takes place in. If a person feels like Blizzard and Activision are the second and third most evil companies ever to exist, they should voice their opinions and try to reason with people, but I would urge someone to give one of their games a try, if it's their preferred genre. Sometimes, the most wonderful gems can be found in the strangest of places. Gems, gems are truly outrageous. They are truly, truly, truly, outrageous.
As #GamerGate continues forward, I urge everyone to remember to step back briefly and take a breath. Remember who you all are and what you stand for. Your love for games is what brought you together, your true calling as gamers.
P.S.: Bonus points if you can catch all the references. Take notes, there's going to be a quiz later.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/03 01:37:14
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/03 01:41:45
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: The fact you keep calling gamers apart of gamer gate GJWs is just showing how much of a childish argument you are proposing. You are doing the. "Oh well if they call me this, then I call them this." Type of argument. Real mature Peregrine. real Mature
And let me guess, you and the other GJWs constantly throwing around "SJW" labels is the height of maturity? If you don't like the GJW label then perhaps you should get the point and stop talking about SJWs?
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sca2pp
You know you posted this already, right?
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/03 01:42:05
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
VorpalBunny74 wrote: Because it. . .is? A sponsor has dropped a corrupt website over anti-consumer practices.
And, as I've pointed out, it's:
1) A completely hypothetical victory, because we don't know what the final effect will be. If the website replaces the ads immediately then they've lost nothing.
2) A "victory" that is all about petty blog drama instead of legitimate issues. This isn't about corruption, it's about having a riot because someone said a mean thing about GJWs.
"Gamers don't have to be your audience, Gamers are over" doesn't ring a teeny tiny little bell?
And if you read the articles in question you'll notice that "gamers" is referring to a specific group of people (GJWs) that are a subset of "people who play games". The better title would be "GJWs don't have to be your audience, GJWs are over". It's nothing more than an article advocating focusing on the non-GJW gamers.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
