Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread. - General

[QUOTE=gudman;46020962]We don't know his motivation, and so far it had no effect on the movement or the stuff he dug up. Sure, be wary, I know I am. But outright demanding dissociation is too far and is uncalled for at present moment. So far his opinion did not show signs of having effect on the issue at hand, and that's what matters. And yeah, I maintain that his views on homosexuality, trans* issues, whatever - have nothing to do with gamergate. A guy who thinks that all jews should die can also easily have an opinion that journalists shouldn't get close to their subjects of attention. People often have a character that isn't one-dimensional. [editline]19th September 2014[/editline] But uhhh... no one said that he should ascend to heaven? Just that he did a good job for our cause.[/QUOTE] What I mean was that, facts and evidence are objective. We can see what he dug up is definitely solid evidence, and not an opinion. However, based on his past actions, we can't be sure if he will/won't "stay the course" so to say. My bottom line is just as I said before, to be skeptical with everything no matter who it benefits/harms.

[QUOTE=BigPalooka;46020998]What I mean was that, facts and evidence are objective. We can see what he dug up is definitely solid evidence, and not an opinion. However, based on his past actions, we can't be sure if he will/won't "stay the course" so to say.[/QUOTE] But no one ever said that we should believe him based on no evidence. And it's not like he said a whole lot without providing some so far. I don't get what's the big deal. As long as he digs up stuff, there's absolutely no problem what so ever.

[QUOTE=gudman;46021007]But no one ever said that we should believe him based on no evidence. And it's not like he said a whole lot without providing some so far. I don't get what's the big deal. As long as he digs up stuff, there's absolutely no problem what so ever.[/QUOTE] Well, you know how fast people like to discredit things because someone said them the wrong way, or because they're said by the "wrong person". It works the other way too, when someone reputable posts something, it's just automatically assumed true and usually not critically analyzed. [editline].[/editline] I'm not very good at getting my thoughts across, so sorry if that's pretty disjointed.

[QUOTE=BigPalooka;46021046]Well, you know how fast people like to discredit things because someone said them the wrong way, or because they're said by the "wrong person". It works the other way too, when someone reputable posts something, it's just automatically assumed true. [editline].[/editline] I'm not very good at getting my thoughts across, so sorry if that's pretty disjointed.[/QUOTE] Well I don't think at the moment we have a lot to worry about. So far GG managed to do a good job at separating bullshit and ignoring it. In not a small part thanks to 4chan's coordinated userbase though, so it might get a little more complicated from this point on.

jeeze lets stop talking the about the dude he is irrelevant even if his info isn't

The point I was trying to make yesterday, for anyone that was confused, wasn't "omg guys milo is a piece of shit, disregard opinions nao", it was that if you're gonna judge the journalists in the mailing group for writing shitty articles in the past, you should also judge Milo as well for doing the same shit. Otherwise that'd be hypocritical. In other words judge both sides or don't judge any.

I'm just annoyed at people pulling the same bullshit that the anti-GG people are doing. Say something bad or that you just disagree with, automatically labelled a misogynist/homophobe/Nazi and everything dismissed until you can prove your innocence. Not only is it bullshit pretending that people fit into nice little groups that you can label and collectively ignore, but it ruins any kind of discussion as everyone goes into a moral panic and assumes the worst. But the entire point is not judging people based on labels or dismissing them on things that are irrelevant. When he starts inserting bits of Mein Kampf into his articles on GG, then you can distance yourself from him, no need to pre-empt it.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxRNRi7bOSI[/media]

let's stop worrying about herr milo for now, all that I care about is that he released the mailing list. I'm not going to throw transgender people or jews under the bus for the sake of video games and neither is anyone else here, that's ludicrous

EDIT: no more milochat

It's a symbiotic relationship. The only thing relevant about Milo is his information. Further props to us if we take it and post it on a pastebin so people don't even give him ad revenue. Since he's slimy as fuck - didn't even realize how deep THAT rabbit hole goes - and has some flat out disgusting beliefs. Also he's transphobic, not homophobic. And his views on transgender and transsexual identity are bullshit. I only care about whether he digs up relevant info, and the moment he becomes useless is the moment we should all drown him and his agenda out of touching GG. Also, remember too that the antiGG side has paraded that article about the 14 year old trans hacker who was doxxed and misgendered. Arthur fucking Chu even argued with me that she was really a guy and could prove it. So I don't trust for a second that Milo is the only transphobic scumball with media influence here.

If Milo's opinions are discarded for being irrelevant, why aren't the journalists in the mailing list as well when they never publicly wrote anything about the situation? [editline]September 19, 2014[/editline] After examining the journalists in the mailing list, I think I can safely say this is the pro-GamerGate equivalent of the IRC logs

They privately called an abuse survivor "deranged." That's enough for me to never read their work again.

So this means no more RPS sponsors? [url]https://web.archive.org/web/20140919131052/http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/09/19/the-rps-supporter-program-is-go/[/url]

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46021830]If Milo's opinions are discarded for being irrelevant, why aren't the journalists in the mailing list as well when they never publicly wrote anything about the situation?[/QUOTE] Because some of they played a role in gamergate? Because some of them write for websties that played a role in gamergate? Because their profession is the one is under scrutiny? You are ignorning their position and Milo's. Milo is someone from the outside trying to shine light on the inside, that he is a scumbag does not change what he has brought up. The journalists that you keep defending (or whatever you are doing) are people that are from the inside and are part of the entire thing gamergate is about. Just look at some of the names in the list, Ben Kuchera, for example. If anything the e-mails show a lot of how certain journalists think and how their personality is. My own opinion in this is quite simple, be critical but not blindly. I feel as if you are just trying be critical and nothing else, you don't want to see the merit in anything. People have told you this multiple times but it hasn't reached you are you just choose to ignore it. If you want to have a debate about the ethics of gathering evidence I suggest you start a new thread. What you are doing now is nothing but clogging the thread.

[QUOTE=Reimu;46021973]They privately called an abuse survivor "deranged." That's enough for me to never read their work again.[/QUOTE] I find it funny(And not in a humorous way) that they're all about making sure zoe shouldn't get death threats or harassment and then vilify an abuse victim until he does.

[QUOTE=Kaelnukem;46022104]Because some of they played a role in gamergate? Because some of them write for websties that played a role in gamergate? Because their profession is the one is under scrutiny? You are ignorning their position and Milo's. Milo is someone from the outside trying to shine light on the inside, that he is a scumbag does not change what he has brought up. The journalists that you keep defending (or whatever you are doing) are people that are from the inside and are part of the entire thing gamergate is about. Just look at some of the names in the list, Ben Kuchera, for example. If anything the e-mails show a lot of how certain journalists think and how their personality is. My own opinion in this is quite simple, be critical but not blindly. I feel as if you are just trying be critical and nothing else, you don't want to see the merit in anything. People have told you this multiple times but it hasn't reached you are you just choose to ignore it. If you want to have a debate about the ethics of gathering evidence I suggest you start a new thread. What you are doing now is nothing but clogging the thread.[/QUOTE] I guess this thread is an echo chamber when someone can't have a different opinion without "clogging up the thread." I keep asking this one question because no one has answered it. Where is the connection? Working for the same company is not a very strong connection because there are multiple people with very different beliefs, opinions, and cliques. [b]No one on the mailing list wrote about any of it.[/b] Prove me wrong. Otherwise I'm done with GamerGate. You've become as blind as the people you hate.

-snip-

[QUOTE=Reimu;46021692]Also he's transphobic, not homophobic. And his views on transgender and transsexual identity are bullshit. I only care about whether he digs up relevant info, and the moment he becomes useless is the moment we should all drown him and his agenda out of touching GG. [/QUOTE] He's pro-gamergate but anti-notyourshield which isn't a great combination. How does one best go about to distance oneself from him? I feel like the actual path that I want gamergate to go along is just littered with black holes like milo or people on the opposition's side which can just veer us off-course so badly without the majority really knowing.

The way to handle people like Milo is just like with Adam Baldwin before: Do not give them respect or visibility. The only time they deserve to be brought up is when they provide genuine information, and only in regards to that information. Otherwise, you just ignore them. Just like the people who would try to otherwise divide and mislead within the movement itself, ignore them.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46022140]I guess this thread is an echo chamber when someone can't have a different opinion without "clogging up the thread." I keep asking this one question because no one has answered it. Where is the connection? Working for the same company is not a very strong connection because there are multiple people with very different beliefs, opinions, and cliques. [b]No one on the mailing list wrote about any of it.[/b] Prove me wrong. Otherwise I'm done with GamerGate. You've become as blind as the people you hate.[/QUOTE]\ But people have answered, I just answered to you as well. But you just don't like the answer and you got it in your mind that because we don't agree with you, we all must be in an echo chamber. I think Milo is an ass, I think Devi is an opportunistic leecher and I find the Internet Aristocrat a creepy conversative. When I listened in to the /Pol stream and the /kotakuinaction I scratched my head multiple times and disagreed with several people. Some of them are bat shit insane rightwings that see this as a big leftist conspiracy, which is fucking ridiculous. But does that change anything at all that some of them have done great work showing what did go wrong and who was involved. You only care about their character and not about their actions that helped further Gamergate as a whole. I study journalism, I spent at least a year studying the damn ethics of journalism and how your own subjectivity gets in your way. I know how these things work and I have had several discussions with people that worked over 30 years in journalism. I have been told that every company has an ideology that their employees follow as well. They work there because they all hold to, pretty much, the same standards. That is why we have different news agencies that have a left, centrist and right leaning. These people that work for their site, as suggests in the e-mail, hold to a certain standard as well. I would suggest you read the e-mails again because you can easily see a behavioural pattern. If you do not understand the difference between Milo and the e-mail group then there is no point arguing anymore. You refuse to understand that them being game journalists and that some of them are part of the ''problematic'' websites weighs higher than a transphobic rightwing that uncovered it. They are part of the group that is under scrutiny, Milo is the one examining it. If Milo is being manipulative about it, write about it and call him out. If Milo fabricated it, write about it and call him out. I do not like every philosopher I read about, that doesn't mean I can pick parts from their ideology and works and learn from it. What I would like to know if there is anything that I have not answered, because I keep feeling that I have repeat myself because you don't agree with my response.

[video=youtube;DLKkY7K_3bY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLKkY7K_3bY[/video]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy]Guilt by association[/url] is your proof

What is wrong with people? The character and opinions about other topics is irrelevant when there's proof of what a person is saying. They are only relevant when you want to take someone's word for it. And regarding gamergate, I don't take anyone's word for it. Doesn't matter if you are literally jesus or literally hitler. I don't believe you until you produce evidence for your claims, and when you do, I will believe the evidence, the character of the person producing the evidence is completely irrelevant.

[QUOTE=Hezzy;46019765]Aligning yourself with a literal nazi because he posts [b]an opinion piece[/b] that fits with your narrow views on gender shows how little moral fibre some people have.[/QUOTE] I am taking the mailing list for what it is, thats all I wanted. Stop fucking acting like because people respect that single piece he did that they align themselves with him and every belief and yadda yadda yadda. Trust me, I only really give a fuck about evidence at this point, theres already plenty of non-confirmed evidence floating around that I dont really need anymore. That is being just as bad as the "SJWs" and "Feminists" who blanket blame entire groups and put words in other peoples mouths.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46022140]I guess this thread is an echo chamber when someone can't have a different opinion without "clogging up the thread." I keep asking this one question because no one has answered it. Where is the connection? Working for the same company is not a very strong connection because there are multiple people with very different beliefs, opinions, and cliques. [b]No one on the mailing list wrote about any of it.[/b] Prove me wrong. Otherwise I'm done with GamerGate. You've become as blind as the people you hate.[/QUOTE] Even if no one directly on the list wrote about it, several site editors are part of it. Which, at bare minimum puts everyone under said sites under question. You're absolutely right to question the validity of all this, that being said...Isn't it still suspicious that all those "Gamers are dead" articles were posted by people underneath the previous site editors' domain? If nothing else it explains how something like that could occur.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46018592]Nobody is taking you serious anymore when you have a massive web detailing everyone's relation, no matter how insignificant, as proof of corruption. To be honest, I think #GamerGate has been finished for some time now. The damage has already been done: game journalist sites have revised their ethics policy; IGF, IndieFund, and IndieCade are suspected of fraud, along with Phil Fish; Zoe and Maya's reputation are down the drain and no one will want to associate with them; and it's very well possible the FBI has gotten involved. The damage has been done. The only thing left to do is wait for an official report, but the internet hate machine doesn't want to stop. They're still very much eager to point fingers at people and conservatives such as Milo are exploiting this.[/QUOTE] can we ignore this guy already he's singlehandedly thrown the thread waay off-topic and continues to shitpost while ignoring nearly everything being said to him

[QUOTE=warneccruid;46021182][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxRNRi7bOSI[/media][/QUOTE] 8:15 "moderation of 4chan was always very hands-off, and I always believed this is a good thing" 12:30 "I've been lucky enough to not totally screw up to the point where people left the site en masse, but I've definitely messed up a lot, and I think most of those mistakes have come from a lack of communication" [editline]19th September 2014[/editline] also this possibility [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/G24KqMI.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;46022751][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy]Guilt by association[/url] is your proof[/QUOTE] Let's look at it from your point of view. There are no groups, only individuals. That multiple journalists started a gamer smear campagne is all up to the individuals that wrote it, because no one checked their article and approved it. So according to you we have a few individuals writing articles that no one is responsible for but themselves. Where does the accountability come in play then? Ben Kuchera is the senior opinion editor for Polygon, which makes him the ''boss'' of the opinion pieces. Which means someone put him into that position on holds his judgement in a high enough regard to screen articles. Does that mean nothing about the quality and standards of a site? What you fail to understand that (I hate using terminology like this) anti-Gamergate is built upon a network of people where a lot of them have a personal relationship with eachother. The pro-Gamergate site is made up of a bunch of anonymous people with some internet personalities that took the role of spokespersons. So can you explain to me how there is not a guilt by assocation, when they are associated with more than just the trait of journalist. Or do you think that I assume EVERY game journalist is a scumbag anti-gamergate leftist SJW? Because I counted at least four journalists that spoke out against censorship in that e-mail group. This isn't journalist A is an asshole so all journalists are assholes. Some journalists on some websites all speak out against gamers, they are a group that all wrote about the same subject. Some of those websites even belong to the same company. They spin the story in a certain way. In what way does that not make them fall in a certain camp? You do very little to explain yourself. I keep having to write these long-ass responses and I all I get in return are some breadcrumbs. Please point out where I am wrong and why that is the case. If I am wrong I would like to know why, so I can understand the situation better.

[QUOTE=Kaelnukem;46022287]\ But people have answered, I just answered to you as well. But you just don't like the answer and you got it in your mind that because we don't agree with you, we all must be in an echo chamber. I think Milo is an ass, I think Devi is an opportunistic leecher and I find the Internet Aristocrat a creepy conversative. When I listened in to the /Pol stream and the /kotakuinaction I scratched my head multiple times and disagreed with several people. Some of them are bat shit insane rightwings that see this as a big leftist conspiracy, which is fucking ridiculous. But does that change anything at all that some of them have done great work showing what did go wrong and who was involved.[/QUOTE] I don't find IA to be a consevative. He's just a creepy, conspirative nut. A midly intelligent creepy nut that's good at talking, but a creepy nut nontheless. Hopefully once this is over I don't have to hear from him again.