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
Thoughts on the Zoe Quinn controversy, "Gamergate", the "death of gamer culture", etc.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Well, it depends on the law... but more seriously, though, the problem here is context, internet threats can hold materiality, but when taking into account the subject matter, and the people involved, and the sheer ridiculousness of said threats, the idea that said threats are anything but a troll getting a rise from both sides, and, more to the point, that not taking a side in the conflict in which they happened is a moral failure is hard for me to accept. The fact that her personal information was posted is something I do have an issue with.
That's just lightning apologism! If anything, though, my own brand of statistical silliness here is more akin to black swan denial.
Quite hostile and vitriolic, and often laden with threats that were implied but never obvious enough for the mods to take significant action.
...Yeah, I was quite the maladjusted teenager. I am so glad that I moved on from that phase, I'm sure as hell not proud of it.
No, actually, I'd like to take them seriously.
Because at best they are toxic to the discourse and represent a chilling effect on people who actually have something interesting to say, and at worst they represent intent to commit major crime.
Same with rape threats.
They're not funny. If you really want to be funny, threaten some kind of silly, fantastical harm instead.
Thanks for taking a stand. Anyway,
Someone has recently threatened Anita Sarkeesian with a Montreal Massacre level school shooting if she did not cancel a talk at Utah State University. She ended up doing so after the school refused to prevent guns from being brought into the auditorium.
See that? Now THAT was a death threat. Look at all this fear! We humans are alive, even if we are Internet users. It doesn't matter if it's a video game, movie, drama, anime, manga, WE'RE ALIVE! People shed blood and die. This isn't a game! You can't just selfishly use death as your tool! This...is Anita's harasser! I bet you've already dismissed this event, the same way you would have dismissed me! And THAT'S why I'm taking down GamerGate!
UPDATE: Now that I got that out of my system, this NeoGAF post summarizes points refuted a thousand times, such as Zoe lying about donating to a charity, only for the charity to confirm they have received the payment. Then GamerGate tried to sue the charity for not disclosing information. Also worth noting, NeoGAF frequently brings up the fact that GamerGate barely makes a peep about the pre-release review contract for Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor.
Also, more evidence that the whole thing was astroturfed. You know, I almost feel sorry for Zoe's ex, since he's so full of hate, but he repeatedly squanders any attempt at sympathy. I do feel sorry for his mother though.
Also, I have to say, when a movement claims to be representing gamers, yet blacklists any gamer who disagrees with you, you know who they're really representing.
You can take them seriously on a level of not tolerating that shit, and then there's taking them all seriously on the level of not being able to distinguish between edgelords and peeps who would actually carry them out and uprooting your life over the former(I've been following the annoying hue who posts most of the Twitter death threats and spams every article on the topic by adding evidence of his behaviour, but we need some genuine BRs to report the guy locally).
Good luck on drawing the line of what constitutes a death/rape/violence threat that is funny. Everybody on both sides argues that when they do it it's hyperbole/satire/irony, and when the opposition does it creates a climate of fear.
^That, however, constitutes genuinely deplorable behaviour(like it even needs to be said), and it's a disappointment that the anons still haven't beaten the FBI to the punch in exposing the assclown.
Oh, law enforcement ought to be smart in telling the difference between someone who made an off-handed comment and someone who is actually bent on causing mass destruction.
But I'm saying that, as a private citizen and as someone who posts on the internet, I have the ability, right, and responsibility to tell people to not say those kinds of things in jest.
Whoever made that threat needs to be hauled off to jail ASAP and questioned thoroughly.
See, when you hate a guest speaker at your school, the correct thing to do is to organize a protest. I don't care whether the school allows it or not, you do it anyway. You get your face and your signs and your people out there to express your dissatisfaction. You editorialize on the school paper and get the local paper to cover you. That means civil means of expressing your displeasure and disagreement. And I support the right to organize protests like this, if it really means that much to you.
No, you don't threaten shootings. That's what horrible jerks do.
Also, Utah seems to have a problem with firearms. Stupid red states and their gun-nuttery...
Yeah, the other thing that pissed me off about the whole thing was it was yet another example of gun bullshit taking precedence over human lives.
Since I can't stop comparing this to Chanology, I remember that said fiasco had ten times the bomb/powder letter threats this has gotten within the same timespan, and that was shoved under the carpet with relative ease, because people are way less sympathetic towards Scientologists, and they had a history of clear-cut false-flags. I imagine the orgs stacked their reception desks with dudettes, so no doubt they received just as many rape threats as the gals involved in Gamergate. Is it that social attitudes have shifted so much in the six years since then, or is it something else?
I didn't even know 4chan was a thing when Chanology happened.
This is terrible, that kid in the meme pic is autistic, of course you will get blowback for it. Video games journalists shouldn't aspire to High School movie 1980's jocks. Good thing charity was raised to fight this stupid.
Also, you guys heard of Gamerfruit? A certain game developer tried harassing a European branch of a game industry only to find out they are produce importers. After a few laughs, The importer has entertained ideas of making a game and helping charity. Not bad.
An editorial on GamerGate, and some social justice activists have realized GG always gets scapegoated and have not joined but are willing to defend it against baseless claims.
Speaking of women, Huffington Post interviews some.
I'm pretty convinced that there are multiple factions using the #GamerGate label at this point, perhaps not all of which are obnoxious, but some are.
Which is why I would like to see the non-obnoxious ones stand down for the moment, and stop using that label, and basically take the babies out so we can let the bathwater drain out.
Also, @ninjaclown, thanks for posting links to articles and essays on the subject. I've read a few, especially the more high-profile ones.
That said, you've posted several pictures as well, and honestly, I don't see any reason to consider them at all trustworthy, so I'm not sure why you're posting them as some sort of evidence.
Trust but verify, even if I say it's trustworthy I'm imploring people to do research and trust places who present facts, like concrete evidence something occurred or someone said something. Do not trust anyone or any news source completely, that's what the questioning ethics part of GG is about.
Also, Glenn, I appreciate you taking a neutral stance. Since GG is supporting consumers rights to not be slandered, they are standing up for people who don't want to join it. Which is hilarious because SJWs are taking the hardline "with us or against us" policy, which only alienates neutral parties, or bully people like GaymerX and boogie into not speaking out in public like twitter. I won't stand for it. GG donated to charities like the one I linked above and Total Biscuit opened one to stop bullying. What have SJWs done to actually benefit women and minorities they claim to speak on behalf of during this debacle, except scream at people online donate endlessly to patreons of each other? I guess that's my real problem with all this.
^It encouraged solidarity, protested for support and made some of the genuine assholes lose their platform. Never underestimate the rush of finally having abuse issues you've suffered for years from being taken seriously: it is evidence of change for the better.
The beautiful thing about Gamergate is that it simultaneously shows how easily the puritanism can turn on you. supporters are using the exact same tactics the SJW clown car uses: digging up receipts of problematic statements, lambasting them for parrotting the usual hurdur white menz nonsense, and throwing the derail playbook in their face whenever they try to weasel out from under it. It's cleaning house for both sides: http://theflounce.com/harassment-abuse-apologism-sanitizing-abuse-social-justice-spheres/
To put it into perspective, have any of you ever been bullied? A fairly large percentage of video gamers were during childhood to high school, and they turned to games and each other to find social acceptance when mainstream culture derided them for being brainless morons or school mass murderers, and now sexists, so when the games media who are supposed to represent gamer interests enjoys slandering you for two months straight on top of the negative stigma gaming has had for years, something...snaps inside. That's why GG is still going, gamers banded together to fight bullies, and the years of slander has made the media their target.
Also, this is anti-bullying month...not the best time for journalists like Sam Biddle to be aspiring '80s movie jocks. Just ask Mercedes car company.
You know, I miss the days when SJW meant PETA-level stupidity that no one truly interested in social justice actually supports. Now it's "Hide your kids, hide your wife, and hide your husband."
Yes. Fucking yes. And constantly getting the message that I wasn't a real gamer because I was a Nintendo nerd was the tame part of it. But I was a bully too, so playing games or being Asian does not make me blameless. And when you threaten to shoot up a school over fucking video games and idolize one of Canada's worst mass murderers, you are the villain, and whatever happened in high school is a fucking terrible excuse for your actions.
And seriously,
You are fucking delusional because anyone who criticizes GamerGate, even beloved game developers or personalities (e.g. Tim Schafer, Jim Sterling, even freaking Jeff Gerstmann who is usually cited as a victim of journalistic corruption), gets shit on by them. So unless you stop posting like a spambot, I will treat you like one.
Also, re: InsanityAddict: I tried giving you the benefit of the doubt before, but you lost me. Nothing justifies harassment, especially not your overblown SJW paranoia. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Fighting fire with fire makes the world go up in flames. Also, I've noticed your initials seem very familiar....
Gawker begs for Mercedes to come back. Biddle really shouldn't have advocated for bullying gamers.
I see you aren't interested in disproving my spambot accusation by actually engaging in discussion.
Speaking of spambots, you were saying pro-GG were using them right?
What is this Mercedes thing?
Black-and-black-morality does not elevate the standing of anyone.
No, I said you were speaking like one. For an example, someone who only goes around comment sections spamming RON PAUL 2012 would be called a Paulbot. Even disregarding that, ever heard of the tu quoque fallacy?
I am curious though, why are you intent on dodging my arguments?
Mercedes observed the pro-bullying tweets Sam Biddle of Gawker kept spewing, and that the EIC of Gawker was favoring them as well as other journalists joining in, so they pulled advertising not wanting to be associated with it. They're not even pro Gamergate, they just don't want to be involved with toxic publications, it's basic Public Relations.
^These spambots automatically spam popular hashtags, dude. Can you also please take some measure in linkdumping everything that appears on KotakuInAction(yes, I know I do this too from time to time)?
@RedEyedAbyss
>giving me the benefit of the doubt in the first place
>thinking I honestly don't know the effect internet mobbing has on people and that it is in any way proportional, no matter how smug, hypocritical or misguidedly abusive they themselves are
>thinking someone across the pond, in a country that still has a debate over goddamn blackface, has any genuine fear of SJWs instead of a deep disdain for the smug, schmaltzy emotional vampire types to the point of pattern-matching everything to it
>not having picked up on the fact that enjoy the flames due to the fact that I've treated every other topic on this forum that I felt reasonably sure I could get away with the same sort of pedantic, edgy irreverence that hallmarks standard garden variety measured jerkishness
After some self-examination, for me these questions boil down to a narcissism of small differences with another cluster of dickheads, I'm realizing now.
A 5 sec google search provides me with this: https://news.vice.com/article/the-netherlands-has-decided-traditional-black-face-is-racist
The comment section, however, gives another view on the subject. Would you mind spoonfeeding me?
I guess it's a good time to remember that keeping a cool head would serve well for everyone involved.
^^^I have to admit, at least you're honest about wanting to watch the world burn. I appreciate honesty, and I mean all that non-sarcastically.
^I know, but I have repeatedly tried to get ninjaclown to acknowledge my points. He acts as if I'm on his ignore list. That wears on you after several weeks.
I really don't know how to feel about all this, really, it's like a neverending parade of insults.
I'm actually wondering whether I should just lock this thread.
Though Stormtroper gets a few points for causing me to recall a Nanoha meme.
I want to know about Dutch blackface first, please.
Some iconic guy who is the assistant of Santa Claus has become a concern regarding racial portrayals or something. It's rather like the redskins controversy, where something traditional may not be suitable for modern culture.
Also, I support locking the thread.
^^^^^It's left up to the municipalities now. Some came up with food-related Petes: http://lifewithadoublebuggy.blogspot.nl/2014/10/kaaskop-piet-and-stroopwafel-piet.html#.VEGHy_l_uSo
^^^^It's a passive sadistic streak I have, but I also know enough about the introspective fallacy to guess that it's probably not all of my motivation. Possible others are some hate-right-back-at-ya involved which I would be too proud to admit to, some annoyance at what I perceive to be hypocritical or logical inconsistency in the views, some downplaying/distraction as a form of tribe loyalty(I think I'd also fall somewhere on the blue-grayish area: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/10/16/five-case-studies-on-politicization/ ), a pinch of forum personality projecting, and a mental coping mechanism for bad stuff.
Edit: I'm against the lockdown: the onus is on people themselves to step away from the computer or close the tab at this point in time. Any criticisms of each other still focus on behaviour, which we should all be able to cope with.