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.

 Sigvatr wrote:
To play devil's advocate here:

Cyber harassment is nigh-untrackable. In order to actually identify someone you need absolute evidence and getting that is troubling to say the least, unless people do so on facebook etc. Anonymous e-mails are completely safe unless you offend a high priority target that can either strike back on his own or is a member of a large institution with the means to strike back.

Up to this point, there has neither been evidence for nor against her actually having been harassed. Anita is an attention seeking individual, so it might just be another low-blow attempt by her, but she might also be honest. Both possibilites are equally likely right now - so don't rush to any conclusions yet.

the FBI has been doing a good job at tracking down anonymous people:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/19/us-europe-cybercrime-idUSBREA4I0GB20140519

100 world wide from just one incident earlier this year. Plus with the NSA collecting all emails, it should be really easy now to track it to it's originating mac address.

They found this guy in Canada:
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/ottawa-man-faces-181-charges-for-international-cyberbullying-harassment

This is why it's important to demand action from her local police department, no one is anonymous anymore.

Let's look at this from the assumption anita is right, she got threatened to the point she fled her house, she called the police (the right thing to do) Yet the police are doing nothing to help her? Where is the outrage at those misogynistic police for doing nothing. Where are the calls for them to take action?

Maybe that damsel in distress trope is a good thing, here we have a damsel in distress an no one is lifting a finger to help her. Not even those that support her.

Oh did people forget about the games too? In the original kickstarter backlash, people made beat up games with Anita.

What?

No.

Just... no.

You don't have to use the damsel in distress trope in order to have the player be heroic and help people.

 Melissia wrote:
What?

No.

Just... no.

You don't have to use the damsel in distress trope in order to have the player be heroic and help people.

Ok, so where is the help for the real person Anita? She fled her house in terror and no one is helping her. Kind of Ironic really.

You don't know that. You're making a ton of assumptions about the situation based entirely off of your ignorance of it, and then drawing conclusions based off of that, then using those conclusions, themselves, as evidence.

It's an astonishing whirlwind of logical fallacy.

 Melissia wrote:
You don't know that. You're making a ton of assumptions about the situation based entirely off of your ignorance of it, and then drawing conclusions based off of that, then using those conclusions, themselves, as evidence.

It's an astonishing whirlwind of logical fallacy.

Don't project your falacies onto me.

There is no evidence for this situation. Yet you're positive she received a valid death threat enough to scare her out of her house, you're positive she notified the police (with no evidence for)

The total lack of any follow through suggest it's all a hoax. Otherwise where are the help anita campaigns? why are feminists ignoring the plight of one of their own and not demanding action from the police? They didn't even set up a fund to help her.

Yes I'm assuming it's a hoax because there is no evidence to the contrary. Just like you're assuming it to be demonstrably true with no evidence either.

show me the police report, or the petition for action, or the rally at the police station. How long must anita live in terror before anyone does anything for her?

the total lack of any concern for her or her plight is enough to convince me it's all a hoax and only a select few, are buying her story. But even those few don't care enough to do anything to try to help.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
You don't know that. You're making a ton of assumptions about the situation based entirely off of your ignorance of it, and then drawing conclusions based off of that, then using those conclusions, themselves, as evidence.

It's an astonishing whirlwind of logical fallacy.

Don't project your falacies onto me.

There is no evidence for this situation. Yet you're positive she received a valid death threat enough to scare her out of her house, you're positive she notified the police (with no evidence for)

The total lack of any follow through suggest it's all a hoax. Otherwise where are the help anita campaigns? why are feminists ignoring the plight of one of their own and not demanding action from the police? They didn't even set up a fund to help her.

Yes I'm assuming it's a hoax because there is no evidence to the contrary. Just like you're assuming it to be demonstrably true with no evidence either.

show me the police report, or the petition for action, or the rally at the police station. How long must anita live in terror before anyone does anything for her?

the total lack of any concern for her or her plight is enough to convince me it's all a hoax and only a select few, are buying her story. But even those few don't care enough to do anything to try to help.

Isn't there that razor thing. You know by Occam? Stay grounded. Not everything is a hox or conspiracy. Some things are just what they look like.

I agree Nomotog, it looks like a attention seeking person is seeking attention.

sirlynchmob wrote:

[snip]

Anita Sarkesian does not matter. In your linked case, said person harassed a few victims over 12 years (!), including online and real-world harassment via Canada Post. Anita merely is someone who wanted attention, got her minutes of fame and ripped off people to make money under false pretense, then went back to where she came from and is now, maybe, looking for a few more minutes. But as stated before: there's no proof for either side right now.

As I pointed out before: officials take action when it reaches a scale large enough to matter. And the FBI and NSA...come on. Why would they bother at all?

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
You don't know that. You're making a ton of assumptions about the situation based entirely off of your ignorance of it, and then drawing conclusions based off of that, then using those conclusions, themselves, as evidence.

It's an astonishing whirlwind of logical fallacy.

Don't project your falacies onto me.

She's not. You're making a bunch of assumptions that may or may not be true.

sirlynchmob wrote:
I agree Nomotog, it looks like a attention seeking person is seeking attention.

Really. Like really that is how you see things? Well that is something. For me the simple answer is someone made threatening tweets that Anita found threading. The idea that she made it all up to get attention sounds like a conclusion someone would jump to.

 Sigvatr wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

[snip]

Anita Sarkesian does not matter. In your linked case, said person harassed a few victims over 12 years (!), including online and real-world harassment via Canada Post. Anita merely is someone who wanted attention, got her minutes of fame and ripped off people to make money under false pretense, then went back to where she came from and is now, maybe, looking for a few more minutes. But as stated before: there's no proof for either side right now.

As I pointed out before: officials take action when it reaches a scale large enough to matter. And the FBI and NSA...come on. Why would they bother at all?

I agree.

As to why the FBI or NSA would bother, if enough angry feminists start to demand action and accusing everyone of being misogynists, it could reach a scale large enough to matter.

There are numerous cases of people getting caught for posting threats, even against 13 year old girls by the police
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2014/07/17/13-year-old-girl-arrested-for-facebook-death-threats-against-entire-town/

it's not hard to catch people threatening online anymore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nomotog wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
I agree Nomotog, it looks like a attention seeking person is seeking attention.

Really. Like really that is how you see things? Well that is something. For me the simple answer is someone made threatening tweets that Anita found threading. The idea that she made it all up to get attention sounds like a conclusion someone would jump to.

google this:

"is faking death threats against the law"

and the first page listed:
http://www.returnofkings.com/42602/did-anita-sarkeesian-fake-death-threats-against-herself

sirlynchmob wrote:

nomotog wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
I agree Nomotog, it looks like a attention seeking person is seeking attention.

Really. Like really that is how you see things? Well that is something. For me the simple answer is someone made threatening tweets that Anita found threading. The idea that she made it all up to get attention sounds like a conclusion someone would jump to.

google this:

"is faking death threats against the law"

and the first page listed:
http://www.returnofkings.com/42602/did-anita-sarkeesian-fake-death-threats-against-herself

http://www.returnofkings.com/

Edit: I couldn't help looking into this place more and I found their credo. Copy and paste.

ROK Community Beliefs:

1. Men and women are genetically different, both physically and mentally. Sex roles evolved in all mammals. Humans are not exempt.

2. Women are sluts if they sleep around, but men are not. This fact is due to the biological differences between men and women.

3. Men will opt out of monogamy and reproduction if there are no incentives to engage in them.

4. Past traditions and rituals that evolved alongside humanity served a net benefit to the family unit.

5. Testosterone is the biological cause for masculinity. Environmental changes that reduce the hormone’s concentration in men will cause them to be weaker and more feminine.

6. A woman’s value is mainly determined by her fertility and beauty. A man’s value is mainly determined by his resources, intellect, and character.

7. Elimination of traditional gender roles and the promotion of unlimited mating choice in women unleashes their promiscuity and other negative behaviors that block family formation.

8. Socialism, feminism, and cultural Marxism cause societies to decline because they destroy the family unit, decrease the fertility rate, and require large entitlements that impoverish the state.

sirlynchmob wrote:


There are numerous cases of people getting caught for posting threats, even against 13 year old girls by the police

I don't need to be a FBI agent to track someone down via Facebook

I may be a sexist white male but why is this social justice warrior stuff of any importance in video games?

When I go on a killing spree I don't care if they are black, poor, have bad education or female. They are just people with no heads to me.

If women want games that wont make them feel oppressed then why don't they make their own game?

I really like japanese devs because of this. They just don't give a gak and make good games (and some not so good).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtFN8G0NN4M

Anita just comes across as a whiny reasonable feminist.

What is harder? Complaining or doing something yourself?

Wait, someone unironically links Return of Kings in a feminism thread?

That's like if someone started posting links to articles on Stormfront in the Ferguson thread.

You cannot convince me to take male supremacists any more seriously than I take white supremacists.

Did not know Return of Kings before. Holy C'tan, what the hell is this?

Are they serious or is that meant to be irony?

"3 ways to not be a beta"

Hint, hint: don't read about being a beta

 Melissia wrote:
Wait, someone unironically links Return of Kings in a feminism thread?

That's like if someone started posting links to articles on Stormfront in the Ferguson thread.

You cannot convince me to take male supremacists any more seriously than I take white supremacists.

How is this a feminism thread, I thought we were discussing the death threats one person claimed to have received.

so only female supremacists are to be taken seriously? that's pretty sexist of you.

I never heard of return of kings before, I'm not sure what they're really about, but they did find evidence to counter anita's claims. But why discuss the evidence when you can use sexism to dismiss them.

sirlynchmob wrote:
so only female supremacists are to be taken seriously?

There haven't been any female supremacists linked in this thread to begin with.

 Melissia wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
so only female supremacists are to be taken seriously?

There haven't been any female supremacists linked in this thread to begin with.

Just the one that started the hoax.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Wait, someone unironically links Return of Kings in a feminism thread?

That's like if someone started posting links to articles on Stormfront in the Ferguson thread.

You cannot convince me to take male supremacists any more seriously than I take white supremacists.

How is this a feminism thread, I thought we were discussing the death threats one person claimed to have received.

so only female supremacists are to be taken seriously? that's pretty sexist of you.

I never heard of return of kings before, I'm not sure what they're really about, but they did find evidence to counter anita's claims. But why discuss the evidence when you can use sexism to dismiss them.

So you linked to a webpage you had never heard of before without checking to see if they had some kind of stated bias. Like the bias they mention in their mission statement?

... moving right along...

 illuknisaa wrote:
I may be a sexist white male but why is this [...] stuff of any importance in video games?

Because being aware of the gak you're writing and reading, or otherwise consuming, and its implications, is by default better than being ignorant of it. Whether or not you think it's a bad thing or just a thing which exists, it's still good to be informed about it.

nomotog wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Wait, someone unironically links Return of Kings in a feminism thread?

That's like if someone started posting links to articles on Stormfront in the Ferguson thread.

You cannot convince me to take male supremacists any more seriously than I take white supremacists.

How is this a feminism thread, I thought we were discussing the death threats one person claimed to have received.

so only female supremacists are to be taken seriously? that's pretty sexist of you.

I never heard of return of kings before, I'm not sure what they're really about, but they did find evidence to counter anita's claims. But why discuss the evidence when you can use sexism to dismiss them.

So you linked to a webpage you had never heard of before without checking to see if they had some kind of stated bias. Like the bias they mention in their mission statement?

If only we had the police report, or a statement from the police as to the status of the investigation. Everyone is biased in some way or another, that doesn't mean they don't have a valid point. Someone with an open mind could read their evidence and figure out for themselves how biased it is.

All we have is anitas word that she received a death threat, and that won't hold up in a court of law.

Lets leave the supremacist talk by the wayside, it never goes somewhere good.

 Melissia wrote:


... moving right along...

 illuknisaa wrote:
I may be a sexist white male but why is this [...] stuff of any importance in video games?

Because being aware of the gak you're writing and reading, or otherwise consuming, and its implications, is by default better than being ignorant of it. Whether or not you think it's a bad thing or just a thing which exists, it's still good to be informed about it.

While I agree, there is still a limit on what is worth knowing about and what is not.

Most of the time SJWs just complain about the most superficial gak. Oh noes smite women have revealing clothes. Declaration of WAR incoming.
If Desperados Wanted Dead or Alive was released today it would massive uproar with the sjw croud.

On top of that sjws don't even bother be informed about this themselves (like anita not playing hitman).

Every time someone mentions "SJW" or "anti-SJW", their soul dies a little. Let's stop mentioning that little reddit war, it's just an excuse for people to scream at each other.

I don't care about that war. You shouldn't either.

If you have an issue with the relevance of what Sarkesian said, mention something specific you don't feel is relevant. We can discuss that.

I wouldn't say that Anita is a SJW. Social Justice Warrior usually refers to people on internet message boards...or forums, jumping on any band wagon that currently interests them, wildly lashing at anyone who disagrees with them. The term basically is the same as "Keyboard Warrior", the former simply has a stronger focus on social issue such as racism or sexism.

In that very case, people frequently referring to Anita as a main source for feminism on video games would be SJW, not Anita herself, as they refer to a highly uncredibly source because it floats their boat whereas Anita is said source.

I still prefer "Keyboard Warrior" though as it has the more ironic / sarcastic connotation, showing why those people are ridiculous. Gosh, I remember an issue on the Blizz forums a few years ago where people went full white knight mode and tried to form an alliance against racism by being racist themselves

well Friedrich Nietzsche said it well:

“Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.”

That happens because people start using their opposition to a thing as justification for throwing away more and more ethical limitations to their actions.