• Anti-gamergate personality Zoe Quinn is getting a movie
    150 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Lord of Ears;49067634]hahaha i bet you think gamergate is still about zoe[/QUOTE] zoë*
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49066694]Nothings gonna come from this.[/QUOTE] Pretty much any major event, personality, or piece of media is rumored to get a movie at some point but few ever do. Often the script remains in limbo to the point where by the time it is ready, said thing has already dropped from public relevance. Thus, the studio just throws it in the bin.
"Ok let's write the script we need the facts about what happened, oh, the zoe post? Ok let's read it, oh... ohh...uhhh welp, guess we're not doing the movie."
[QUOTE=No_0ne;49067638]good fucking luck to the poor sap that's hired to write the script[/QUOTE] some people revel in writing that stuff [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRnbUm48R7c[/media]
This movie made no sense. Yeah I was following it along pretty well in the beginning but then it got really weird, I think the director got high or something. It started off with some affair drama and then YouPorn popped up out of nowhere along with some really weird cameo's. Adam Baldwin, Will Wheaton, Mercedes Carrera, hell it even had a tangent with Ice T. I don't know what they were thinking when they added that Sea Lion subplot as well. They should also fire who ever did the color correction/makeup on it, everyone's hair looked weird. 6/10.
I hope they get a shitty director so this movie will actually be entertaining.
I was just gonna post and walk away, but whatever. Gamergate and the drama surrounding it is like a drug, it's hard to stop. I always gotta go back for one more hit. I'm honestly surprised that a year and a half later people just wanna dogpile these people for different opinions, over some alleged "SJW conspiracy" that I don't quite get or understand. I've been pretty much on the opposing side of GG but that's because I've seen the awful stuff those people have done. I can't think of any positive thing Gamergate has done outside of championing "free speech" when it's something they prefer. If it ain't, it's "SJW pandering." Hell, I don't even get what an SJW is besides "A person with opinions I don't like, and instead of ignoring it and moving on with my life, I must prove them wrong at every opportunity." It's the sludge that came out of chan/anon culture, and it's the goddamn worst. Now for a few replies: [QUOTE=megafat;49067271]Because sleeping with reporters for coverage is good enough to congratulate some for.[/QUOTE] TBQH I don't give a fuck about her sex life, or anyone else's. Don't know why that became such an issue. Plus mentioning her [B]free [/B]game once and covering an event she was involved in is barely "positive coverage," jesus. People don't complain about review embargoes for the biggest triple-A games yet everyone gets in a tizzy over some woman game designer's relationship. You'd be surprised how many games journalist people are friends with game designers in the industry. You can't keep them separated in a bubble, otherwise you get regurgitated press release bullshit that was around during the 80s and 90s. Look back at that stuff, it's [I]fucking boring to read[/I]. It's not interesting. This is how actual journalism happens: When you get scoops like these. It's how shit works. [QUOTE=matt000024;49067518]To be honest, I still don't really know what the fuck Gamergate/Anti-Gamergate is at this point.[/QUOTE] Ignore the videos that one guy posted and read this [URL="http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gamergate"]RationalWiki article[/URL] instead. The videos posted have a distinct bias towards Gamergate, and only tell the side that they want to hear, rather than the actual truth like the Rationalwiki article states. Anyway, I wouldn't mind having rational conversation about all this if this was a year ago, but now it's all played out. There's no way to make Gamergate look good nowadays. If you're actually in that community because of "ethics in gaming journalism," try a different community and movement because Gamergate is not it.
[QUOTE=Ithon;49067688]some people revel in writing that stuff [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRnbUm48R7c[/media][/QUOTE] Controversy sells. Telling the truth isn't profitable. [editline]7th November 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] Ignore the videos that one guy posted and read this RationalWiki article instead.[/QUOTE] Today I learned that RationalWiki has no biases whatsoever and that using youtube videos with sourced and verifiable information is not an acceptable form of discussion. Did you watch the videos in question before posting? If so, can you argue why they're wrong? We can't have a discussion if you assume you are always right and that anyone who disagrees with you is a fat, basement dwelling nerd. That's called confirmation bias. There's a reason why a lot of people who assume your side of the argument tend to get banned from this forum for shitposting. [QUOTE]I'm honestly surprised that a year and a half later people just wanna dogpile these people for different opinions, over some alleged "SJW conspiracy" that I don't quite get or understand.[/QUOTE] If you don't understand something, why are you so sure about your unsubstantiated opinion on it? [QUOTE]I've been pretty much on the opposing side of GG but that's because I've seen the awful stuff those people have done.[/QUOTE] Such as? [QUOTE]I can't think of any positive thing Gamergate has done outside of championing "free speech" when it's something they prefer.[/QUOTE] Literally, one of the videos I posted goes into just that. Ethics policies, Disclosure Agreements, Native Advertising addressed by the federal trade comission, supporting a charity to help women make video games, etc. It also cost a corporation that stole movie scripts, leaked sex tapes and outed a gay man who didn't want to be outed over a million dollars in advertising revenue. [QUOTE]and instead of ignoring it and moving on with my life, I must prove them wrong at every opportunity."[/QUOTE] And why are you here exactly?
[QUOTE=matt000024;49067518]To be honest, I still don't really know what the fuck Gamergate/Anti-Gamergate is at this point.[/QUOTE] I blame SJW's blowing it way out of fucking proportion along with other factors. [QUOTE=coyote93;49067663]Am I supposed to know who she is?[/QUOTE] Infamous feminazi who is also a video game developer, a shitty one I might add.
[QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] Ignore the videos that one guy posted and read this [URL="http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gamergate"]RationalWiki article[/URL] instead. The videos posted have a distinct bias towards Gamergate, and only tell the side that they want to hear, rather than the actual truth like the Rationalwiki article states. Anyway, I wouldn't mind having rational conversation about all this if this was a year ago, but now it's all played out. There's no way to make Gamergate look good nowadays. If you're actually in that community because of "ethics in gaming journalism," try a different community and movement because Gamergate is not it.[/QUOTE] It's extremely ironic you cite Rationalwiki as an unbiased source, I'd go as far as to say its comical. Its pretty clear the editors are trying to demonize Gamergate. In fact isnt the highly obssessed Ryulong a major contributer to it? Do you also browse GamerGhazi for your facts by any chance?
[QUOTE=SelfishDragon;49067804]It's extremely ironic you cite Rationalwiki as an unbiased source, I'd go as far as to say its comical. Its pretty clear the editors are trying to demonize Gamergate. In fact isnt the highly obssessed Ryulong a major contributer to it? Do you also browse GamerGhazi for your facts by any chance?[/QUOTE]Ryulong was basically the sole contributor to the article after Wikipedia banned him for his massive bias in his moderating and abusive practices. Then RationalWiki also banned him for being literally crazy and spending eight hours one day editing the article almost every minute.
[QUOTE=SelfishDragon;49067804]It's extremely ironic you cite Rationalwiki as an unbiased source, I'd go as far as to say its comical. Its pretty clear the editors are trying to demonize Gamergate. In fact isnt the highly obssessed Ryulong a major contributer to it? Do you also browse GamerGhazi for your facts by any chance?[/QUOTE] The main editor of the GamerGate article on RationalWiki literally got banned from Wikipedia for malicious editing and abusing people. [QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;49067812]Ryulong was basically the sole contributor to the article after Wikipedia banned him for his massive bias in his moderating and abusive practices. Then RationalWiki also banned him for being literally crazy and spending eight hours one day editing the article almost every minute.[/QUOTE] This.
[QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741]Anyway, I wouldn't mind having rational conversation about all this if this was a year ago, but now it's all played out. There's no way to make Gamergate look good nowadays. If you're actually in that community because of "ethics in gaming journalism," try a different community and movement because Gamergate is not it.[/QUOTE] If that advice did work then I would have left long time ago. They want no discussion about it period, it's why the SavePoint controversy occurred at SXSW. It disassociated from the GG label, but people wanted it to be removed because they thought that it was a misogynist conspiracy.
[QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] Anyway, I wouldn't mind having rational conversation about all this if this was a year ago, but now it's all played out. There's no way to make Gamergate look good nowadays. If you're actually in that community because of "ethics in gaming journalism," try a different community and movement because Gamergate is not it.[/QUOTE] I'm willing to have a rational discussion right here and now, as are many people in this thread. The first part of the discussion has to be you being willing to consider arguments other than your own and watch the actual videos I posted.
[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;49067815]If that advice did work then I would have left long time ago. They want no discussion period, it's why the SavePoint controversy occurred at SXSW.[/QUOTE]Its why the SPJ AirPlay had a bomb threat called against it by AGG.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;49067829]Its why the SPJ AirPlay had a bomb threat called against it by AGG.[/QUOTE] To be fair, that may have also been done by third party trolls on the internet who like to drum up controversy. Of course that doesn't remove from the actually [url=http://www.ship2block20.com/hidden-face-hypocrisy-randi-harper/]vocally anti-gamergate personalities[/url] [url=http://magicalmelonball.tumblr.com/post/119295027334/rant-guilty-until-proven-innocent]who have been really abusive.[/url]
[QUOTE=Zyler;49067742]Today I learned that RationalWiki has no biases whatsoever and that using youtube videos with sourced and verifiable information is not an acceptable form of discussion. Did you watch the videos in question before posting? If so, can you argue why they're wrong? We can't have a discussion if you assume you are always right and that anyone who disagrees with you is a fat, basement dwelling nerd. That's called confirmation bias. There's a reason why a lot of people who assume your side of the argument tend to get banned from this forum for shitposting.[/QUOTE] Okay then. Let me go through them. First of all, I've dealt with LeoPirate, the guy who posted some of those videos. He's a right nut, who easily misconstrued my words about NotYourShield being the gamer's equivalent of "I'm not racist, I have black friends." Cue a dogpiling of massive proportions, including Slade "Roguestar" Villena calling me racist. All because he thought I was as "crazy as Arthur Chu." (I disagree with Chu on some things, just for the record.) The thing about the "Gamers are Dead" thing is one: Nobody says they're "dead," and two: The stories are implying that the gaming culture doesn't necessarily need to be made into this special nerd-dom gatekeeping thing, it should be for everyone. Everybody should play video games, big and small. It's like saying people just casually watch TV shows or movies aren't hardcore unless they eat sleep and breathe that stuff, and it's ridiculous. Also it baffles me that the concept of people coming up with a similar idea in a similar timeframe is foreign to them. Do these people not read the news??? Then we got the SPJ Airplay fiasco. It's telling when no professional critic wants to show up, and you end up with Milo Yiannopolous, a scamming dickhead who writes clickbait for views and bandwagons only when it's profitable (he wrote an article disowning gamers months before GG, that was before he realized he could make $$$ off it), and Christina Hoff Sommers, who's an alleged feminist working for the American Enterprise Institute, a right wing think tank. From what I heard, it was a trainwreck that was hardly about journalistic ethics. I wonder whatever happened to Milo's Gamergate book he said he was working on. Lastly, in my original reply I didn't call people "fat, basement dwelling nerds." I said "goony nerds." I almost said "Goony bearded nerds," but then I realized not everyone on there has a beard. I just get concerned why they must dogpile these people, and what their ultimate goal is. It's these people I don't understand, especially this AlphaOmegaSin guy. He could be doing something helpful, at least trying to understand things rationally, but instead he'll ramble on about those "PESKY SJWs" under a moniker of ANGRY NERD MAN (seriously, "angry youtuber" stopped being cool around 2008). I'm reminded of a video he made where he rambled on for 15 minutes on someone selling a prototype of Final Fantasy II on the NES for $50,000, where his argument was "YOU CAN BUY HOMEBREW COPIES FOR $30!". Not realizing that all those homebrew copies [I]came[/I] from said prototype, but I digress. I don't think I'm shitposting. Then again, I'm just a member of this forum. The reason why I don't want to debate is because I've tried to. Countless times. The same arguments pop up. I give the same counter-arguments, only for them to throw me off path (One time a GGer on Twitter went from arguing about game reviews to babbling on about Anita Sarkeesian when I didn't bring her up, which I still don't get) or start dogpiling. I only suggest the RationalWiki post because to me it gives a pretty clear picture on what's going on, more than any other source would.
[QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] Ignore the videos that one guy posted and read this [URL="http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gamergate"]RationalWiki article[/URL] instead. The videos posted have a distinct bias towards Gamergate, and only tell the side that they want to hear, rather than the actual truth like the Rationalwiki article states.[/QUOTE] [quote]Gamergate is a hostile reactionary mob in the video gaming community that grew out of a misogynist undercurrent in gaming, nourished on 4chan and similar websites.[/quote] Wow, very first sentence and already it's factually incorrect. Amazing.
[QUOTE=TonicBH;49067844]Okay then. Let me go through them. First of all, I've dealt with LeoPirate, the guy who posted some of those videos. He's a right nut, who easily misconstrued my words about NotYourShield being the gamer's equivalent of "I'm not racist, I have black friends."[/QUOTE] That's because NotYourShield is made up of actual minorities and women who are sick of being exploited for internet brownie points and LeoPirate is one of those said minorities. Good job, you've essentially insulted a black man for "having a black friend". [QUOTE]Cue a dogpiling of massive proportions, including Slade "Roguestar" Villena calling me racist. All because he thought I was as "crazy as Arthur Chu." (I disagree with Chu on some things, just for the record.)[/QUOTE] People disagree with you on the internet. "Hey guys, everyone who disagrees with me is a goony nerd, hey wait why are people so pissed at me?" Maybe they called you racist because you were insulting minorities and, like I said, insulting a black man for "having a black friend". [QUOTE]The thing about the "Gamers are Dead" thing is one: Nobody says they're "dead," and two: The stories are implying that the gaming culture doesn't necessarily need to be made into this special nerd-dom gatekeeping thing, it should be for everyone. Everybody should play video games, big and small. It's like saying people just casually watch TV shows or movies aren't hardcore unless they eat sleep and breathe that stuff, and it's ridiculous. Also it baffles me that the concept of people coming up with a similar idea in a similar timeframe is foreign to them. Do these people not read the news???[/QUOTE] Those articles claimed that there were no women and minorities in gaming to begin with. Do you understand how that might piss people off? Particularly with how you keep doing the thing that the articles are doing, assuming that because people disagree with you on the internet that they aren't inclusive and more importantly, aren't made up of women and minorities who are apparently abusing themselves. [Quote]Then we got the SPJ Airplay fiasco. It's telling when no professional critic wants to show up, and you end up with Milo Yiannopolous, a scamming dickhead who writes clickbait for views and bandwagons only when it's profitable (he wrote an article disowning gamers months before GG, that was before he realized he could make $$$ off it), and Christina Hoff Sommers, who's an alleged feminist working for the American Enterprise Institute, a right wing think tank. From what I heard, it was a trainwreck that was hardly about journalistic ethics. I wonder whatever happened to Milo's Gamergate book he said he was working on.[/QUOTE] This isn't an argument. Do you have an issue with something somebody actually said, or are you relying on name-calling because you don't have a point? Christina Hoff Somers is a registered democrat and a liberal feminist. Frankly, I think Milo is a shithead but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be allowed to speak. [QUOTE]Lastly, in my original reply I didn't call people "fat, basement dwelling nerds." I said "goony nerds."[/QUOTE] Yes, because that's so much better. [QUOTE]It's these people I don't understand, especially this AlphaOmegaSin guy. He could be doing something helpful, at least trying to understand things rationally, but instead he'll ramble on about those "PESKY SJWs" under a moniker of [b]ANGRY NERD MAN[/b] (seriously, "angry youtuber" stopped being cool around 2008).[/QUOTE] There are dozens of women who talk about this stuff too, I guess you haven't searched for them. [QUOTE]I don't think I'm shitposting. Then again, I'm just a member of this forum. The reason why I don't want to debate is because I've tried to. Countless times. The same arguments pop up. I give the same counter-arguments, only for them to throw me off path (One time a GGer on Twitter went from arguing about game reviews to babbling on about Anita Sarkeesian when I didn't bring her up, which I still don't get) or start dogpiling. [b]I only suggest the RationalWiki post because to me it gives a pretty clear picture on what's going on, more than any other source would.[/b][/QUOTE] Maybe if you can't find another source that gives "a pretty clear picture" it's because the source you gave isn't correct and you only like it because it agrees with you? Lastly, you haven't answered any of my questions, like what horrible things have the GamerGate people actually done? I can't know what your problem is unless you actually tell me.
[QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741]I was just gonna post and walk away, but whatever. Gamergate and the drama surrounding it is like a drug, it's hard to stop. I always gotta go back for one more hit. I'm honestly surprised that a year and a half later people just wanna dogpile these people for different opinions, over some alleged "SJW conspiracy" that I don't quite get or understand. I've been pretty much on the opposing side of GG but that's because I've seen the awful stuff those people have done. I can't think of any positive thing Gamergate has done outside of championing "free speech" when it's something they prefer. If it ain't, it's "SJW pandering." Hell, I don't even get what an SJW is besides "A person with opinions I don't like, and instead of ignoring it and moving on with my life, I must prove them wrong at every opportunity." It's the sludge that came out of chan/anon culture, and it's the goddamn worst.[/QUOTE] I am going to be honest this is more something I want to say in general, not soley directed at you. When you come into a topic self admittedly not understanding something. [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] that I don't quite get or understand.[/QUOTE] Don't then go and claim you understand it [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741]over some alleged "SJW conspiracy" that I don't quite get or understand.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] I've been pretty much on the opposing side of GG but that's because I've seen the awful stuff those people have done. [/QUOTE] Okay? Are you suggesting that the action of one person reflects on the group? If so I would like to point out the absolutely sickening things that have been found out on the AGG side. Verifiable and a lot more central than a random twitter account. If not, judge the individual, not the group. [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] I can't think of any positive thing Gamergate has done outside of championing "free speech" when it's something they prefer. If it ain't, it's "SJW pandering." Hell, I don't even get what an SJW is besides "A person with opinions I don't like, and instead of ignoring it and moving on with my life, I must prove them wrong at every opportunity." It's the sludge that came out of chan/anon culture, and it's the goddamn worst.[/QUOTE] Honestly at this point you seem to be actively ignoring trying to understand what these people mean. I don't think anyone can deny there are extremists in any group. People like those that nearly bullied an artist into suicide because they were a "culturallly appropriating racist sack of shit" fall into the category of extremist. [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] TBQH I don't give a fuck about her sex life, or anyone else's. Don't know why that became such an issue.[/QUOTE] Again you claim not to understand the issue and then present a statement that would require you to understand the issue. Some people care because it blatantly shows a disregard for journalistic practices. It does not matter that it's a free game, not disclosing your relationships with those you are writing about is a flagrant violation of the readers trust. Some people care because they consider it to be evidence of an abusive relation. Some people, I would say most, don't care either way and are focused soley on gaming. [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] People don't complain about review embargoes for the biggest triple-A games [/QUOTE] Again you seem to be ignoring that people do complain about review embargoes. Specifically considering any review embargo a sign of impending shit. [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741]You'd be surprised how many games journalist people are friends with game designers in the industry. You can't keep them separated in a bubble, otherwise you get regurgitated press release bullshit that was around during the 80s and 90s. Look back at that stuff, it's [I]fucking boring to read[/I]. It's not interesting. This is how actual journalism happens: When you get scoops like these. It's how shit works. [/QUOTE] No one is asking for them to be separated. What people are asking for is disclosure regarding the relationship between the journalist and the subject. Specifically because it's an abuse of the readers trust, subsequently because it's embarassing when readers find out the person game you are promoting is also your flatmate. Furthermore having a sentence at the top of an article disclosing any COI's does not impact the content in any negative way. I would argue that how hard journalists are fighting back against this shows that there might be some COI's to worry about. [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] Ignore the videos that one guy posted and read this [URL="http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gamergate"]RationalWiki article[/URL] instead. The videos posted have a distinct bias towards Gamergate, and only tell the side that they want to hear, rather than the actual truth like the Rationalwiki article states. [/QUOTE] Video's with archived evidence are biased. This source is apparently unbiased. [URL]http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/10/11/yet-another-woman-in-gaming-has-been-driven-from-her-home-by-death-threats/[/URL] [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] Anyway, I wouldn't mind having rational conversation about all this if this was a year ago, but now it's all played out. There's no way to make Gamergate look good nowadays. If you're actually in that community because of "ethics in gaming journalism," try a different community and movement because Gamergate is not it.[/QUOTE] 1) Going from your statements prior I really think that you are lying when you say [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741] Anyway, I wouldn't mind having rational conversation about all this if this was a year ago[/QUOTE] 2) all played out really makes no sense 3) The same could be argued against many prominent Anti-Gamergaters. It is a moot point. 4) And then get banned because if you try to discuss ethical infractions in games journalism you are instantly called a misogynistic racist internet terrorist. [QUOTE=TonicBH;49067844]Lastly, in my original reply I didn't call people "fat, basement dwelling nerds." I said "goony nerds." I almost said "Goony bearded nerds," but then I realized not everyone on there has a beard. I just get concerned why they must dogpile these people, [B]and what their ultimate goal is.[/B] It's these people I don't understand, especially this AlphaOmegaSin guy. He could be doing something helpful, at least trying to understand things rationally, but instead he'll ramble on about those "PESKY SJWs" under a moniker of ANGRY NERD MAN (seriously, "angry youtuber" stopped being cool around 2008). I'm reminded of a video he made where he rambled on for 15 minutes on someone selling a prototype of Final Fantasy II on the NES for $50,000, where his argument was "YOU CAN BUY HOMEBREW COPIES FOR $30!". Not realizing that all those homebrew copies [I]came[/I] from said prototype, but I digress. [/QUOTE] Something I don't understand is you will strawman out Gamergate as "SJWs are the real ILLUMINATI!1" conspiracy theorists. And then immedietlly after that, you insinuate that it's a Gamergate conspiracy.
[QUOTE=Zyler;49067879]Christina Hoff Somers is a registered democrat and a liberal feminist.[/QUOTE] Slight aside for the uninformed, this is very literally what Sommers is. Like, the actual sociological concept. She pushes the issue of legal equality between men and women, ergo she is a Liberal Feminist. She reports through AEI because they would publish for her. She otherwise does not care about them.
[QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741]Ignore the videos that one guy posted and read this [URL="http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gamergate"]RationalWiki article[/URL] instead. The videos posted have a distinct bias towards Gamergate, and only tell the side that they want to hear, rather than the actual truth like the Rationalwiki article states.[/QUOTE] Rational Wiki is not a source anybody should take seriously. [editline]7th November 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Thlis;49067883] This source is apparently unbiased. [URL]http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/10/11/yet-another-woman-in-gaming-has-been-driven-from-her-home-by-death-threats/[/URL][/QUOTE] WeHuntedtheMammoth and TheMarySue are not sources that should be taken seriously. They're basically blogs without any standards.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49067903]WeHuntedtheMammoth and TheMarySue are not sources that should be taken seriously. They're basically blogs without any standards.[/QUOTE] I believe that is his point.
will it be as tragic/cringy as the Gamechangers?
[QUOTE=Zyler;49067879] Lastly, you haven't answered any of my questions, like what horrible things have the GamerGate people actually done? I can't know what your problem is unless you actually tell me.[/QUOTE] Besides harassing, dogpiling and gaslighting Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, Randi Harper, Jenn Frank, Mattie Brice, Phil Fish, Brianna Wu, Dan Olson, Leigh Alexander.... I honestly can't think who else. The few positive things I could say they did was look more into journalistic ethics. Maybe. Even stuff like "donating to charity" is a bit suspect, especially the whole "Fine Young Capitalists" thing (They're not a charity, it's pretty obvious in their freakin' name.). Perhaps you could give me a list of their accomplishments. I said that it's all "goony bearded men" complaining, and I apologize for leaving out the few who don't fit that stereotype, like Liana K and Oliver Campbell. However, I respectfully disagree with their opinions. Much like I do with a lot of people in the Gamergate crowd. I see nothing wrong with Quinn or her inevitable book/movie. It baffles me people still have a weird hateboner for her a year and a half later, that's all.
[QUOTE=TonicBH;49067741]Ignore the videos that one guy posted and read this [URL="http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gamergate"]RationalWiki article[/URL] instead. The videos posted have a distinct bias towards Gamergate, and only tell the side that they want to hear, [B]rather than the actual truth like the Rationalwiki article states.[/B][/QUOTE] :s: no matter what you believe about gamergate, you're a straight fool if you believe this, rationalwiki is just the left wing version of conservapedia and while they're slightly less retarded in some parts they're still obviously distorting and dropping facts out the wazoo
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49067933]:s: [B]rationalwiki is just the left wing version of conservapedia[/B][/QUOTE] As a matter of fact, they actually started as a [I]reaction[/I] to Conservapedia, which doesn't exactly spell out "factual, unbiased source" to me.
pretty disturbing how someone can support a known abuser because they agree with their politics
I'm sure that this will be just as successful as Quin's other project. C.O.N.
[QUOTE=TonicBH;49067924] Even stuff like "donating to charity" is a bit suspect, especially the whole "Fine Young Capitalists" thing (They're not a charity, it's pretty obvious in their freakin' name.). [/QUOTE] I am sorry but you have never had any intention of being as you say "rational" or "unbiased". You don't even know what TFYC is. It's literally a group funding project to allow women to get into game design/concept roles with practically 0 risk and everything to gain.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.