Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
It's worth watching this video. It's forty-five minutes long, but very good an a fantastic example of how much more well done this kind of thing can be:
>If I decided "hey, I'd like to get $5,000 dollars worth of additional video equipment to help me improve the quality of these free videos on cheese-making I'm putting on the internet in my spare time", I sure as hell wouldn't be able to do it on a whim. I may not even be able to get it in several months depending on what's going on with higher priority expenditures at the time. If 2500 people liked my cheese-making videos enough to kick in a couple of bucks a piece, though, then it would be doable, and we would hopefully all be able to enjoy the deliciously cheesy fruits of their generosity.
But unless your camera was actually busted or something then it's not something you would actually need to make proper videos. And you certainly wouldn't need to go fifty times your quota. It's this demand for a bad thing to have slightly higher resolution, and yes, people throwing their money at it that is bad. It could go to other actually productive causes or hell, to funding games that actually do have feminists bents to them.
This isn't something that she alone is doing in the gaming circle and the idea that she deems her stuff important enough to be paid to do what others are doing for free (and better) irks me highly and makes me question her actual commitment to it.
In any case, I have to go to work. (It feels good to say that)
And that's a bad thing...?
It's a meh thing.
It is if it's insincere.
I suppose, but spiteful charity is still better than no charity at all.
bluh, better not
@Kraken: That's pretty much what I said. And yeah, I don't think a mediocre creation getting so much attention/lauding is a good thing, regardless of the bile getting thrown against it.
It's the motives that I object to, here.
Wait, there are Extra Credits ones? Really?
On the topic, I agree her past videos were kind of mediocre but I don't understand the hate she's getting for it. Apparently there are people who disagree that she was mediocre, no? Otherwise she wouldn't have gotten the money to make more.
And the responsibility for the piles of money she got after the trolls started harassing her belongs to the trolls. Don't want unintended consequences like that, don't be an asshole.
yeah, but
transformers is the same thing. except it's more bad, but you see my point.
>And the responsibility for the piles of money she got after the trolls started harassing her belongs to the trolls.
Yeah, no. While what the trolls did was horrible the people who donated still had the agency to make informed decisions. They didn't.
So in the long run trolling is actually a good thing, since it gives others sympathy for the victim.
Not really, I see no sympathy in this thread, I do see some good suggestions, but let's be honest, this place is wholly a vacuum where those suggestions are gonna go to waste for the most part.
Ah, bad thing that I was being entirely serious there then.
See, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. It is highly presumptive, not to mention arrogant, to just flat out assume that someone making a decision on what cause to donate to on the internet wasn't making an "informed" decision. A decision you disagree with, sure. But who are you to judge what decision is right for those individuals who saw it differently?
I'm talking specifically about people who donated to her just because of the trolling or just because of the feminist agenda in response to BlackHumor's statement.
and I mean, really, the person I am to judge is well... someone who thinks. 'Who are you to judge' is a worthless statement in this context.
I think that it's a pretty valid question to ask, considering the fact that you have very limited information on who donated and why, and yet you're seemingly fine with declaring that they did not make informed decisions. We don't have proof that anyone gave money just because of the trolling... it may very well have been people who saw her videos, liked them, and then decided to show their support once they saw that she was being treated unfairly.
and it's more likely that they were reactionary like a good deal of people acted in a reactionary manner as people are wont to do concerning political issues, ones concerning media especially so.
Am I making conjecture? Of course I am, but it's not without precedent.
Fuck, I'd argue seeing worth in this videos constitutes being uninformed.
As far as I can tell from reading this thread, an informed decision only has to be as simple as "well, I can tell from watching her video(s) that she already has good equipment, why does she need more money?".
I dunno, maybe she was renting it? Maybe she just felt that her equipment and setup weren't adequate? I mean come on, it's not like you would go to Tim Schafer's Kickstarter and talk about how "He's a famous game developer, he doesn't need those donations! He already has enough money to make a game on his own!" It's just disingenuous to say that you think that there's no possible way any of the people donating to her donated out of actually liking her videos and, God forbid, actually wanting to see more of them made.
Come on guys, I'm the socio-anarchist here and even I agree that she should be allowed to get better equipment if she really wants to.
>I dunno, maybe she was renting it?
Even if this ridiculously unlikely possibility is true (considering how regularly she releases videos) she can't continue this why?
>Maybe she just felt that her equipment and setup weren't adequate?
She's wrong.
>I'm the socio-anarchist
Labeling yourself doesn't give your opinion any validity. It just makes you sound like you're trying to deny a bias.
Tim Schafer's case in incomparable because we know where the money has gone to. It's to fund the considerable nature of making a game. In TVTVWiG's case she already has the resources, that being a camera, herself, and video editing equipment. Simply put, it's obvious why a game needs so much money. It's also obvious why talking into the camera about sexism doesn't.
Backtracking a bit as I missed some posts earlier, my apologies:
I don't have an issue with questioning. It seemed like people (not necessarily you) were actually getting annoyed/upset over this, which was what spawned my question in the first place, so I apologize if I was misreading the situation.
On the "you will get more of what you buy" issue, I would imagine that such would be a desirable outcome for people who buy things that they enjoy. It may not benefit others who don't enjoy those things, but there's nothing wrong (as is the case here) with supporting something you like even if it's at odds with someone else's idea of quality.
From my understanding, going over her quota was outside of the video-maker's hands. She set a goal, and people overwhelmingly responded to it in a way that exceeded her expectations. Because of that she's not only going to replace her video equipment (the original goal), but also hire a film crew to work on some new videos (which could very well show a marked increase in the quality of the videos), and then donate the rest to charity. The latter should meet just about anyone's criteria of a productive use of the money, regardless of how silly it is for us to decide how productive an anonymous person's donation choices are.
As Nova put it before, the thing is, it's much like supporting something like Transformers in that it also enables any people who is interested in doing this kinda thing to measure themselves up to the standards set by the predecessor (Not like what Anita's doing here is "unique" except for Internet standards, 'course)
I mean, I can live with the fact that Transformers sells, which leads to shit like Battleship. But it doesn't mean I can't point out that the fact that this is being supported is what would (hypothetically) lead to weaker discussions on topic that needs to be discussed in this day and age, considering the growing prominence of video games.
I see this the same way I see something like the Nostalgia Critic and AVGN becoming the "golden standard" for internet video reviewing in terms of internet video discussions on social justice and such. Not to say that Anita's focus is to become something comedic like that, but her material so far seems equally or even more shallow than James and Doug, where at least, they admit upfront that the material they are working with is not entirely a wielding of their knowledge so much as a parody of internet rage. But you get the idea, I imagine.
"See, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. It is highly presumptive, not to mention arrogant, to just flat out assume that someone making a decision on what cause to donate to on the internet wasn't making an "informed" decision. A decision you disagree with, sure. But who are you to judge what decision is right for those individuals who saw it differently?"
In fact, many people have donated because they were, guess what? Fans of the show. Inconceivable, I know.
We would have never known, thanks for your highly condecending contribution, it is most welcome, and in no way similar to this useless post.
See what I did there?
no, can you please explain it some more?
My pleasure: I was like, you know, minding my own business, being inconsiderate to people, and then this dude says like "uh, you guys are like, failing to take into account actual fans of the show, nevermind the fact there was no show to begin with when the fundraising happened" and then I was like "dude, condecension is hip, am I doing it rite" and then it was you like "ooh, please explain" and I was like "cool, I'll gladly explain".
That hurt to write.