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
Tangentially, I have a hard time trusting anyone whose chosen handle is some kind of title. Amazing Atheist, Internet Aristocrat, Nostalgia Critic, King of Hate, etcetera. It feels like they're carving out a space and a role on the internet instead of growing into it naturally.
Also, I think that it's gotten to the point where everyone who actually wants to make a positive difference about anything should probably just lay low and let both sides' partisans fight it out. After a while, the partisans will get bored, the fighting will stop, and it'll be easy to move on from the name "GamerGate" and other soiled names and actually try to do something useful, about the quality of game journalism, about sexism, and about the quailty of discourse that surrounds the videogames industry and its fans.
Also, "GamerGate" is such a silly name. This isn't a scandal about gamers (as in the playerbase); it's a scandal about game journalists. And developers/publishers.
I've seen that link before. Now that I finally bothered to read it, wow, "All females are sluts and deserve to be depressed" is the evidence you use to "prove" she wasn't harassed? Also, cherry-picked tweets and screenshots does not a proof make.
Considering that you continue to ignore my links to the IRC chat coming out of 4chan themselves, you seem very selective as to your source reading.
Like I hinted multiple times throughout this thread, I make a hobby out of watching news sources, and the supposed game journalism "scandal" is nothing that doesn't happen on a regular basis in any other news. In Canadian news alone, I've seen plagiarists continue to write articles with only a slap on the wrist, news conglomerates getting cozy with oil companies, and voices getting spied on for disagreeing with the government. And that's not even getting into nasty editorializing such as laughing at people mourning a dead politician and blaming rape victims for being drunk. Also, the very point of think tanks is to churn out biased, partisan research, no matter how misleading (e.g. The Fraser Institute). With video games, the corruption is about social liberals saying mean things (which I already pointed out is a normal part of the opinion article discourse) and getting cozy with indie devs (which I have not followed significantly, but there's a lot of paranoia from people who understand nothing about journalism). I know that you too follow news on a regular basis, so I'd like to hear your perspective on the issue.
Also, I already started a new thread for serious discussion of video game reporting ethics without the GamerGate baggage.
On the other side, expecting female video game players to not be angry about being systemically marginalized is like blaming the entire town of Ferguson for acting out on Michael Brown's unjust death, because both have damn good reasons to be pissed off.
they understand nothing about journalism except for the fact that there is supposed to be a wall separating you from reporting about friends and people you are paying for.
Why do I have a feeling, there was less of a fuss over these riots from a couple of weeks ago, than from which videogame developer did what?
^^http://www.caj.ca/ethics-guidelines/
Nowhere does it say that you can't report on friends, just that it needs to be disclosed to the general public. To my recollection, reporters often start interviews with "I've known X for a certain period of time".
^Black people are a minority, so Ferguson doesn't affect as many netizens.
VYeah, that was me saying that we have more posts in the "gamer" thread than all our posts on Ferguson combined.
I think someone actually pointed this out on IJBM itself.
Sure, disclosed to the general public is what is expected of the journalist, like disclosing patreon funds that have to do with the reported in question, something that wasn't done before this shitstorm in a teacup.
I do wish that Canadian news reporters and companies receiving oil company funding would inspire this level of protest. Without the Tea Party paranoia and anti-intellectualism, of course.
Let's start a mailing protest of our own then!
I think the logic is that it was a scandal related to the word "gamer".Mails are out, and they're just as underwhelming as the IRC logs: http://yiannopoulos.net/2014/09/19/gamejournopros-zoe-quinn-email-dump/
Also, someone send Milo 90 rolls of toilet paper, which is the most underwhelming use of doxxing in the history of the internet.
This video from a Syrian is quite informational, if you guys are interested.
Also, Assange is a supporter of GamerGate as well, he posted a reddit AMA where he covered part of it.
>Cultural Marxism
>Appears on Alex Jones
Oh, for fuck's sake, just name the Chosen People already, all this pussyfooting is so boring.
Also, an eulogy for /v/: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh5AHXaU-9M
Newest theory is that dear Christopher Poole is being manipulated by his genki not-grillfriend:
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/eihl45hmgi/mallory-blair-25/
http://observer.com/2013/03/small-girls-pr/
http://nypost.com/2011/06/21/meet-the-click-chicks/
People are already reaching out on Twitter, let's see how this develops.
Apparently, it's because she works for Gawker, who owns Kotaku. It all goes full circle.
Which of these is more plausible?
Pseudo-raids get deleted because they clog up the board.
m00t rubs shoulders with tech/indie dev folks and is embarassed that his site is a hub used to harass them.
Ahhh yesss... sorry for forgetting about you REA.
Pardon me for being late to the party, but was this spate of articles about the "death" of gaming (or gamer culture or the term "gamer") mostly regarding the modern western video game fandom, especially the segment typically stereotyped as liking gory FPSes with really high-resolution and the ability to trash-talk and teabag opponents? or is it a broader, narrower, or different segment?
It's the segment that cries foul whenever female playable characters are introduced, supposedly. Or when gay options are available. Or when heteronormativity is not taken as granted. Or when non-white people are playable. Basically, a mishmash boogieman of every person who holds a conservative or outright reacctionary view.
"Women want to take our toys away" Kinda deal.
So is the "death of gaming" thing is entirely linked to issues regarding gender and race (and people's reactions to it)? Or are there parts of it that are not related to these issues?
to me, and take my word with a grain of salt. The death of gaming plethora of articles is merely a bunch of people with similar mindsets making a stand against a specific group of people and ascribing to them a set of characteristics they thought they possess (women-hating white het cis male with a fear of proggresive ideas of any kind). The only problem was that most of these articles painted a brush too wde of who were they categorizing as a problem in the gaming culture, and thus drew the ire of any people who felt that gamer as a word was misrepresented in this instance.
Is anyone interested in the philosophical side of this? I came across this article about how re-framing the ideological basis of a movement to something insidious no one will actually support (questionable journalism ethics - gamers hate women) qualifies as "Intellectual Bullying." If nothing else, it explains why anti-GG people keep focusing on the misogynst perspective to distract from the issue of journalism standards, or lack thereof.
That, and people who support GG are getting "doxxed", or having their personal information spread on the internet so the target and family/friends/employers can be harassed. That's despicable.
Considering that you've repeatedly ignored my counter-arguments in this very thread, you're one to talk about distracting from issues. If you actually paid attention to the IRC chat links, you would have realized that people are saying #GamerGate is about gamers hating women because that is 4chan's motivation for astroturfing the hashtag. In fact, a lot of articles opposing GamerGate acknowledge that not everyone is in line with 4chan, but if you ask me, those people haven't done enough to dissociate themselves from 4chan's misogyny.
I've also said many, many times that this barely qualifies as a journalistic scandal to anyone who actually follows news on a regular basis. I've even made a separate thread to seriously examine game reporting ethics. But whatever. You've shown that you have no interest in actually carrying out a two-sided conversation, so good day.
In fact, you can blame me for this happening on this very forum. I feel that people intended to target the hardcore types who referred to themselves as the only ones worthy of the "gamer" title, but others who distanced themselves from the bullying and misogyny got caught in the crossfire since they perceived the word more generally. Personally, I feel that at least part of the controversy is connected to "gamer" as an exclusive title of an exclusionary club, since that was my reason for wanting to dissociate myself from the word.
Uh...kay, bye. Not sure why the philosophical article earns personal ire, but whatever. I had no idea you were taking it personally. I apologize for that.
That's the thing, this isn't the 90's. "Hardcore" gamers are not just a bunch of teens with "girls are mean" mindsets. They are a bunch of 30 somethings with jobs and families, so it feels to me like they were preaching to a choir that left the stage a while ago. Because the stereotype is not quite up to the facts of the modern scene.
Incidentally, the 30-somethings with jobs and families typically have less time to waste arguing with people on IRC or various large forums, so they (not by their choice) end up with bored teens and college students alleging to speak (often poorly) on their behalf.
(I think that this is probably a common problem with democracies with non-mandatory participation in the policymaking process.)
I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally would want the movement for videogame journalism integrity to rebrand itself and differentiate itself from this entire shitstorm (Zoe Quinn and all), because (1) I have seen far, far more attention (mostly negative) given to Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, and other so-called SJWs, by people who identify with the tag #GamerGate*, and (2) if they can get away from this shitstorm, they could probably get much more done, and have much more widespread support.
It's certainly possible that #GamerGate could eventually evolve into that, but I don't think #GamerGate as a whole collective movement currently has the requisite reputation to build trust at this point.
* I actually hung out on a relevant IRC channel at one point, and after a little while of idling, I'd seen enough criticisms of SJWs/feminists/etc., including many outright insults. Regardless of whether they were insults and/or offensive, the fact that people were still making these criticisms -- and largely focusing on the offensiveness of the people they were criticizing -- also indicated a lack of focus on the topic of journalistic integrity.
That said, this was back when the phrase "Five Guys Burgers and Fries"/"Five Guys Burgers and Lies" was a thing, and to its credit, #GamerGate has since seemed to have moved on from that. And perhaps the conversation has broadened since I last looked at it. (Maybe. As a person who doesn't know where to look to get an updated pulse on this controversy, I can't say for sure.)
You have a point, GMH. In fact, looking back at the past few days, I have foolishly spent much more time posting about it when I should have been focusing on my studies. In all honesty, I'm content to simply observe events as they occur, and I will continue to do so but probably not engage due to lack of time. To me, this is not a movement, like a country-wide cultural revolution, but simply a consumer backlash. If you insult your userbase you will lose, no matter how noble you think your message is. It's like snack companies using ad campaigns like "Buy our snacks fatty, get offended we know you can't stop eating, oink oink." I do hope there will be an amicable resolution, however slim the chances may be.
Skipping a couple of posts: I'd say, given 4chan's reputation, I wonder if they need any kind of woman-hating agenda to do their hatery. On the other hand, that might be just what they want me to think.
When the complaints about "journalistic integrity" largely resemble Fox News-esque criticism of the mainstream media having a liberal bias, I see little reason to entertain them. I'm all for having a serious discussion of video game reporting, but I don't see much of that here.