Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread. - General

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;46014576]Just because you're able to name a fallacy doesn't mean you're able to identify one, clearly[/QUOTE] Why does a past opinion invalidate any new contradicting opinion? Do people not grow or change at all in your world view? Why should the rebuttal of Milo's evidence not be questioned?

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;46014576]Just because you're able to name a fallacy doesn't mean you're able to identify one, clearly[/QUOTE] Clearly you have no idea what an ad hominem is. [quote=Wikipedia]An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.[/quote] How is that not exactly what you are doing?

Because all I was doing is pointing out Milo has a history of not exactly respecting gamers not saying "the mailing list doesn't exist because he's a dick"

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014598]Why does a past opinion invalidate any new contradicting opinion? Do people not grow or change at all in your world view? Why should the rebuttal of Milo's evidence not be questioned?[/QUOTE] Orland is more credible than Milo [editline]18th September 2014[/editline] And if you say you can't believe his peers, then at that point there's nothing that can be done to change your mind.

Adam Baldwin is talking on this stream. [url]http://www.hitbox.tv/kingofpol[/url]

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;46014620]Because all I was doing is pointing out Milo has a history of not exactly respecting gamers not saying "the mailing list doesn't exist because he's a dick"[/QUOTE] And that fact isn't relevant, because literally the first his article that brought him to our attention started with something along the lines of "well I used to wrongly be a dick to gamers, but..."

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;46014620]Because all I was doing is pointing out Milo has a history of not exactly respecting gamers not saying "the mailing list doesn't exist because he's a dick"[/QUOTE] So what's the point if your post then but to say that yes, his information is worthless because of the source of it, but orland can't be questioned in the same way, he can write an article about how he's not a bad guy and we HAVE to take that at face value. Even when you guys try you're still hypocrites. [editline]18th September 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46014639]And if you say you can't believe his peers, then at that point there's nothing that can be done to change your mind.[/QUOTE] Okay thanks for showing you too have long since had your mind set on the "truth"

Im kinda glad there is some infighting, but im sure it would distract us from the entirety of the movement if it continues for too long.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014657]his information is worthless[/QUOTE] Didn't say that, also never said anything about Orland, like ever, stop and read please

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014657]Okay thanks for showing you too have long since had your mind set on the "truth"[/QUOTE] I believed the Breitbart article until I learned the past articles he's written and then the counter article undermined his credibility.

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;46014675]Didn't say that, also never said anything about Orland, stop and read please[/QUOTE] I am reading. You're just not saying much besides "hey this guy was a fuck stick why would you trust his info" which is an ad homonim [editline]18th September 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46014694]I believed the Breitbart article until I learned the past articles he's written and then the counter article undermined his credibility.[/QUOTE] So you do take orland at face value here and aren't questioning further? Thanks, now stop being a hypocrite

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014699]So you do take orland at face value here and aren't questioning further? Thanks, now stop being a hypocrite[/QUOTE] I have already questioned it by examining his character. I put a lot more value in his words than a guy who 180'd his stance on video games in a month.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014699]So you do take orland at face value here and aren't questioning further? Thanks, now stop being a hypocrite[/QUOTE] Just like how you are seemingly unwilling to question the Breitbart article. Who's the hypocrite here?

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46014717]I have already questioned it by examining his character. I put a lot more value in his words than a guy who 180'd his stance on video games in a month.[/QUOTE] Why? Besides the inevitable character assassination you have to make to justify that, why? Why would you trust orland flat out when he's only being vetted by questionable people as well [editline]18th September 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Manibogi;46014731]Just like how you are seemingly unwilling to question the Breitbart article. Who's the hypocrite here?[/QUOTE] Did I ever say it was true? [editline]18th September 2014[/editline] Oh wait no I didn't thanks for sticking fucking words in my mouth.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014742]Why? Besides the inevitable character assassination you have to make to justify that, why? Why would you trust orland flat out when he's only being vetted by questionable people as well[/QUOTE] Why don't you believe anything Zoe Quinn puts out? Because of her character assassination? A person's character is indicative of their honesty.

nooooooooooooooo infighting

[QUOTE=Destroyox;46010616]Bug, SJW, corrupt journalists, same thing really. [video=youtube;OOOOYo9vHzo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOOOYo9vHzo[/video] Also someone really needs to make an edit out of the full thing just like the one about Russia. I mean holy shit, looking through the whole scene again the whole thing writes itself, just replace a few words. [I]Out of the ashes of 4chan come first sorrow...[/I][/QUOTE] Wish granted [video=youtube;msYSRmJLQeA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msYSRmJLQeA[/video] It was surprisingly difficult to replace bug with SJW. Most of the time I could only manage SJ.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46014761]Why don't you believe anything Zoe Quinn puts out? Because of her character assassination? A person's character is indicative of their honesty.[/QUOTE] A persons actions are most important. Orlands actions here are questionable. So are Milo's. The reason not to trust Zoe Quinn is not an ad homenim, it's based on her actions.

Please give me reason to believe Milo and not Orland

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;46014576]Just because you're able to name a fallacy doesn't mean you're able to identify one, clearly[/QUOTE] no, I can see the ad hominem too. I'm a little skeptical, but I want to see where he goes with it, Milo is not done and though it would be nice to see other journalists weather or not tabloid would have the information there isn't much room for other journalists at this time to get a hold of this information and report it without bias and want to report it with interest. Maybe if someone from the escapist also got the source, kept the oath of keeping your sources secret, then reporting on it unbiased-ly, fantastic. I was taught that if you are left leaning and someone on the right is making a point, even if they sound different they might have a point. Also goes vice versa.

How come it took like, one Twitter post for you to think there's no reason to question Orland? Is that how we determine it? One tweet?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014783]A persons actions are most important. Orlands actions here are questionable. So are Milo's. The reason not to trust Zoe Quinn is not an ad homenim, it's based on her actions.[/QUOTE] Writing an article is an action

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46014784]Please give me reason to believe Milo and not Orland[/QUOTE] Why do you people think I'm saying "believe milo" and then accuse me of not reading? I never said he was right. I said why isn't orland questionable.

[QUOTE=TheJoey;46014762]nooooooooooooooo infighting[/QUOTE] [video=youtube;UAeqVGP-GPM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAeqVGP-GPM[/video] Can we drop this topic before it drags on for another five pages, please?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014793]How come it took like, one Twitter post for you to think there's no reason to question Orland? Is that how we determine it? One tweet?[/QUOTE] Go on his [url=https://twitter.com/KyleOrl]Twitter[/url]. There were way more that I just wasn't arsed to post like [img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3877425/ShareX/2014/09/2014-09-18_14-28-47.png[/img]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014742] Oh wait no I didn't thanks for sticking fucking words in my mouth.[/QUOTE] Unpleasant ain't it

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46014798]Writing an article is an action[/QUOTE] One that's by default truthful and trust worthy? Obviously not [editline]18th September 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46014809]Go on his [url=https://twitter.com/KyleOrl]Twitter[/url]. There were way more that I just wasn't arsed to post like [img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3877425/ShareX/2014/09/2014-09-18_14-28-47.png[/img][/QUOTE] Being described as a nice person is not what I'd call proof of unshakable ethics

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014783]A persons actions are most important. Orlands actions here are questionable. So are Milo's. The reason not to trust Zoe Quinn is not an ad homenim, it's based on her actions.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46014783][B]A persons actions are most important.[/B][/QUOTE] Like writing shitty articles? Like Milo's? You're defending Killer more than you're debunking his claims, I hope you realize that.

I give up. You fundamentally do not understand how to evaluate someone's character. I'd have more luck arguing to a brick wall. I'll just repost what I posted a few pages back: [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46014060]I'm not going to lie, I'm quickly losing a lot of support for #GamerGate because of how knee jerk everyone is, how absurd these conspiracy theories are becoming, and how fast people are to support/oppose someone based on a single article.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Manibogi;46014837]Like writing shitty articles? Like Milo's? You're defending Killer more than you're debunking his claims, I hope you realize that.[/QUOTE] Milo's post is only bullshit if orland is right. Of course, if we start by assuming orland is right, milo must be a person not worth listening to. I don't think you even read what I say honestly [editline]18th September 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46014843]I give up. You fundamentally do not understand how to evaluate someone's character. I'd have more luck arguing to a brick wall. I'll just repost what I posted a few pages back:[/QUOTE] Okay now insult me because I don't agree with you. I'm not even being knee jerk. I'm asking a fucking question.