• Corruption in Gaming Journalism Discussion V2 - Back from the dead!
    5,003 replies, posted
That weird feel when even TIGA follows Wu and femfreq and the whole shitty journo clique
[QUOTE=Wii60;47183554]self awareness is fun [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/b5gBIgT.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] But that's exactly what they've been doing for the past couple of years. These people spout so much bullshit that they can't even recognize the taste of shit anymore.
Oh the irony of his statement.
[QUOTE=nomad1;47182261]I'm not sure where this poll was done but I saw it retweeted on twitter. [IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-TDxXjIgAAzRGJ.jpg:large[/IMG][/QUOTE] [B]Update:[/B] misogyny is now at 22% and I can't believe it.
[QUOTE=SebiWarrior;47185925][B]Update:[/B] misogyny is now at 22% and I can't believe it.[/QUOTE] That's the thing about polls, they can be rigged easily with a horde of idiots running a LOIC-like program or a literal illegal botnet. The wethepeople website had (or has) the same problem.
22% is still pretty low I'd say
[QUOTE=Géza!;47186169]22% is still pretty low I'd say[/QUOTE] It was 28% when I had cast a vote yesterday. So it's dropping.
[URL="https://imgur.com/nAxgNCD"]Anti-Gamer expresses desire to gas PAX because he hates GG, Wu decides to cherry pick quotes to make it seem like GG'ers were the ones threatening to gas PAX.[/URL] Fucking... it's shit like this that makes me want this to just end now. I can't take the blatant lies and false accusations anymore, I want these assholes exposed and publicly shamed.
This is so curious. I am literally started being triggered by her atrociously stupid tweets. How is such thing possible? It's just a dumb shit writing stuff half across the world and it still infuriates me that she still got support.
[QUOTE=Xenomoose;47186381][URL="https://imgur.com/nAxgNCD"]Anti-Gamer expresses desire to gas PAX because he hates GG, Wu decides to cherry pick quotes to make it seem like GG'ers were the ones threatening to gas PAX.[/URL] Fucking... it's shit like this that makes me want this to just end now. I can't take the blatant lies and false accusations anymore, [B]I want these assholes exposed and publicly shamed.[/B][/QUOTE] At this rate they're almost doing it themselves. [editline]21st February 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Dark RaveN;47186421]This is so curious. I am literally started being triggered by her atrociously stupid tweets. How is such thing possible? It's just a dumb shit writing stuff half across the world and it still infuriates me that she still got support.[/QUOTE] Apparently you can spew stupid shit all you want as long as you've gotten a sob story as a "get out of jail free card" [editline]21st February 2015[/editline] I sound like a cynical asshole saying that, but that's honestly the summary
[img]http://i.imgur.com/SFjCee8.png[/img] Even TB is getting sick of this shit.
TB's been sick of this shit for a while. It's just that most of the time his pain meds keep him mellow.
[QUOTE=Thlis;47186470][img]http://i.imgur.com/SFjCee8.png[/img] Even TB is getting sick of this shit.[/QUOTE] That first response is golden.
Refer to this whenever someone comes up with the usual "you shouldn't talk about this because it makes us look bad and it gives them ammo" bullshit. If they don't have anything to throw at you they'll make it up, and if you don't fight back people will believe it.
Wikipedia is using [I]tweets[/I] by Anita as sources to gamergate now. [URL]http://i.imgur.com/P1c4R8r.jpg[/URL] Just remember though, anything else is unreliable. Fucking cunts, somebody needs to control this. What makes her any more reliable then any other dickwads tweets? ([I]This is related to not directly quoting a person but rather using the quote as a source for different information!![/I]) Up until this point wikipedia has never accepted any form of social media post as an acceptable source - now suddenly it is. The fact they have to bend rules to make this article acceptable anymore is utterly ridiculous and shows that nothing happened to improve the article.
Then remove them. Or add your own. If they try to stop you, you have every piece of evidence necessary to get them shutdown. Don't let them run the show. [editline]21st February 2015[/editline] If Wikipedia is allowing Tweets to stand, we have ample evidence from them both still present and archived to throw back, to literally overwhelm them with. Use their own weapon against them. Allowing tweets only gives us more to fight them with.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;47186785]Then remove them. Or add your own. If they try to stop you, you have every piece of evidence necessary to get them shutdown. Don't let them run the show. [editline]21st February 2015[/editline] If Wikipedia is allowing Tweets to stand, we have ample evidence from them both still present and archived to throw back, to literally overwhelm them with. Use their own weapon against them. Allowing tweets only gives us more to fight them with.[/QUOTE] Only tweets from "reliable" people are allowed. It means they can cherry pick who is reliable and who isn't.
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;47186839]Only tweets from "reliable" people are allowed. It means they can cherry pick who is reliable and who isn't.[/QUOTE]Do the exact same thing. Every time they try to stop you, it gives more evidence for another case to be brought against them.
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;47186839]Only tweets from "reliable" people are allowed. It means they can cherry pick who is reliable and who isn't.[/QUOTE] Allowing tweets either opens up the floodgate for using tweets from both sides OR shows that some editor(s) has a obvious agenda instead of only documenting it like what Wikipedia is supposed to be about. Either way that can be used against them, if anything it shows that even Wikipedia has some people that needs to be rooted out due to lack of bipartisanship
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;47186868]Do the exact same thing. Every time they try to stop you, it gives more evidence for another case to be brought against them.[/QUOTE] Admins will perma-ban you if you attempt it. Veteran editors on Wikipedia got years long bans for daring to be neutral on GamerGate wiki article. It's impossible to edit this article without anti-GG bias, without admins and moderators responsible with that disaster of article get removed permenatly from Wikipedia. Which was attempted, but sanctions were rather modest and were lifted later on. Basically, it's a lost cause unless Jimmy Wales intervenes. And he won't.
Try regardless. Seriously, its cowardly to go "But they'll ban us!" What is the difference between being banned and not even putting in the effort? You're not getting heard either way, but at least in one case you've tried.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;47187016]Try regardless. Seriously, its cowardly to go "But they'll ban us!" What is the difference between being banned and not even putting in the effort? You're not getting heard either way, but at least in one case you've tried.[/QUOTE] At least in one case you have solid proof of the bias
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;47187016]Try regardless. Seriously, its cowardly to go "But they'll ban us!" What is the difference between being banned and not even putting in the effort? You're not getting heard either way, but at least in one case you've tried.[/QUOTE] That's the thing, it was tried many times for long while. Brick wall and perma-bans were only result. Only way this can be fixed if all admins and editors guilty of that article mess just give up from constant pressure. But that requires hundred's of people to just zerg rush them for long time, which I doubt it's possible to be organized. And if it was organized, it would be against Wikipedia rules. So it's either hope for Jimmy Wales to do something productive for once for his site or hundreds of people conspire to pressure off biased admins and editors. Or 2nd options happens just spontaneous instead of organized. Not exactly good options, as well too much work to just fix a single Wiki article that is just an aftermath of a real problem.
If you're afraid to try or put in the effort, then why bother at all? Why are any of us bothering with this? If adversity is enough to stop it, what hope is there?
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;47187116]If you're afraid to try or put in the effort, then why bother at all? Why are any of us bothering with this? If adversity is enough to stop it, what hope is there?[/QUOTE] Because in case of GamerGate article, anti-GG crowd has all the power to deny any neutrality and censor any dissent. It's like trying to get into /r/GamerGhazi and hope not to be banned for disagreeing with people there. And even if you were to succeed, win results would be minor. However not bothering to go there, I don't think we shouldn't bother at all. Pressuring many gaming media outlets to follow ethics, spreading the message on social media, reddit and Youtube, rallying support from major figures in gaming industry and etc. are where effort to battle corruption in gaming media prove to be very successful and have big win results. I'm simply saying we should focus our efforts where it really matters and it's possible to get to neutral ground on whole GG controversy, at least. Trying to get GG Wiki article to be neutral seems just too much effort for very little gain, overall.
As another note on the wiki thing, if major victories are won and the mainstream public becomes more informed about what's really happening with GamerGate, the wikipedia article will pretty much have to be forced to be changed to reflect these events. All in all, whatever the content in the wikipedia article turns out to be depends on what the final outcome of GamerGate is.
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;47186738]Wikipedia is using [I]tweets[/I] by Anita as sources to gamergate now. [URL]http://i.imgur.com/P1c4R8r.jpg[/URL] Just remember though, anything else is unreliable. Fucking cunts, somebody needs to control this. What makes her any more reliable then any other dickwads tweets? ([I]This is related to not directly quoting a person but rather using the quote as a source for different information!![/I]) Up until this point wikipedia has never accepted any form of social media post as an acceptable source - now suddenly it is. The fact they have to bend rules to make this article acceptable anymore is utterly ridiculous and shows that nothing happened to improve the article.[/QUOTE] NorthBySouthBaranof is blatantly ignoring his topic ban too and nobody is even intervening with that. Hell, some are even cheering him on, and one of the admins is even protecting the hack. It just shows how Wikipedia is gonna sink: Massive cronyism and agendapushing behind the scenes. This should really be exposed, because just face it, the only way Jimmy Wales is going to listen to us is if we shoot publicly a few holes into Wikipedia's already low credibility and thus end up hurting his wallet.
[QUOTE=Jordax;47187264]NorthBySouthBaranof is blatantly ignoring his topic ban too and nobody is even intervening with that. Hell, some are even cheering him on, and one of the admins is even protecting the hack. It just shows how Wikipedia is gonna sink: Massive cronyism and agendapushing behind the scenes. This should really be exposed, because just face it, the only way Jimmy Wales is going to listen to us is if we shoot publicly a few holes into Wikipedia's already low credibility and thus end up hurting his wallet.[/QUOTE] The fact they're treating opinionated tweets from selected persons as facts is ground enough for controversy, considering it's Wikipedia and not a smutty tabloid.
[QUOTE=Xenomoose;47187258]As another note on the wiki thing, if major victories are won and the mainstream public becomes more informed about what's really happening with GamerGate, the wikipedia article will pretty much have to be forced to be changed to reflect these events. All in all, whatever the content in the wikipedia article turns out to be depends on what the final outcome of GamerGate is.[/QUOTE] Indeed. This is the most realistic way to get GamerGate Wiki article to get changed, but that's gonna take a long time.
Is Wu's patreon still up? Didn't they promise that they will remove it, due to the page breaking the new rules or something?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.