Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread. - General

[QUOTE=Xonax;46137169]So GG's goal is to stop corruption in Journalism correct? What about people complaining about the "SEXISTS OBJECTIFICATION" female characters in games?[/QUOTE] That's fine to me, as long as that complaining is done in a way that isn't harmful. I wouldn't complain about the people complaining if they didn't go against studies and didn't fabricate stuff. The people who do that mingle a lot with journalism though, which is why the issues are pretty much inseparable. [editline]3rd October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=FangLargo;46139054]Apart from the Eron case (which isn't looking very good), I can't imagine a satisfying 'win' scenario, if there is one. It probably won't look 'good', but one thing we might be able to do is simply ignore GamerGate all together. Look forward. Now that I think about it, what do I care if people support aloof Social Justice Developers and Social Justice Narrators, and such like? As long as the [I]good[/I] games are being supported else where in the magnitude they deserve, I don't care what those other people do. Basically, it's that poverty vs equality argument. Does equality matter if no one lived in poverty? If good developers are getting good support, monetary and recognition, from gamers, if by YouTubers or guerrilla journalism, does it matter if other jerks are getting coverage by the likes of Kotaku and Polygon? It's not fair, but I hope it won't matter. Not to say that the abuse aspect of LW's scandal should be ignored. Abuse is always wrong, and I can only hope that Eron gets the justice he deserves.[/QUOTE] The issue with that approach is that they are smearing gaming in mainstream press, which is going to make it more looked down on and will lead to worse games due to potential developers being turned away and self-censorship of developers who want to avoid controversy. If we just ignore it it's going to become as nasty as feminism with tons of radicals and people who tell others what to think of themselves.

I'm back, hello. Just figured I'd say this: I believe a lot of people on the other side never had any intention of positioning themselves for or against this movement, but felt inclined to shoot it down when they see it because of their friends' experiences, or things like the astroturfing of writers they appreciate. The thought of this as a movement and an opposing movement isn't fully true, even though a lot of people operate out of the same pastebin documents, Anti-gamer gate is not a movement the same way gamer gate is, and gamer gate is not a movement the same way even occupy is. I know this may sound like a cheap thing to say, but those of you with legitimate concern about the business would probably do much better if you started something else and took off on your own path completely.

[QUOTE=meazum;46139191]I'm back, hello. Just figured I'd say this: I believe a lot of people on the other side never had any intention of positioning themselves for or against this movement, but felt inclined to shoot it down when they see it because of their friends' experiences, or things like the astroturfing of writers they appreciate. The thought of this as a movement and an opposing movement isn't fully true, even though a lot of people operate out of the same pastebin documents, Anti-gamer gate is not a movement the same way gamer gate is, and gamer gate is not a movement the same way even occupy is. I know this may sound like a cheap thing to say, but those of you with legitimate concern about the business would probably do much better if you started something else and took off on your own path completely.[/QUOTE] The problem with that is we would lose all momentum. I would love to shake off the gamergate name but it just isn't possible without splintering the movement and causing it to fall apart.

I figured as much, the issue with doing a thing related to or out of gamer gate is, as I said that it is at least a movement of some kind, the burden of being in a mob does not fall upon the opposition the same way, because they never were, even if they got influenced by the same people as each other, they never explicitly all banded together under one flag to do anything. If it isn't obvious yet, I'm not a GG booster at all. I just believe there are some of you who have very legitimate concerns, and that you shouldn't have to be dismissed the way I'm afriad you will be. Also, with regards to the intel thing, I don't think it's fully fair of them to pull advertisements based on content. If a site is expected to appease its advertisers, that severely limits the possibility for engaged critical writing. I know you probably feel this is the best way to revolt against what you perceive as an oppressive system or movement, but this kind of organised strike against editorial content is very un-democratic, regardless of whether the person deserves it or not. (Please don't equate this with advertisers not wanting to advertise on porn sites or torrent sites, that is a different issue about different content.)

[QUOTE=meazum;46139246] ... Also, with regards to the intel thing, I don't think it's fully fair of them to pull advertisements based on content. If a site is expected to appease its advertisers, that severely limits the possibility for engaged critical writing. I know you probably feel this is the best way to revolt against what you perceive as an oppressive system or movement, but this kind of organised strike against editorial content is very un-democratic, regardless of whether the person deserves it or not. (Please don't equate this with advertisers not wanting to advertise on porn sites or torrent sites, that is a different issue about different content.)[/QUOTE] The problem is we tried democracy. We pointed out our problems with the articles, and the head editors just shrugged it off (less escapist who did well). Now to the advertisers, it's not just about content, but about audience demographic. Intel hires ad space on Gamasutra under the assumption that a games blog has a main audience that will be gamers. They get a flood of emails saying gamers will no longer be reading said blog (nor buying the product). And so the audience demographic of those ads have changed. Now intel has three options: Remove the ads, leave the gamer-targeted ads to a non-gamer audience or change the ads to appeal to and audience that doesn't realise that AMD and intel can't run on the same motherboard. Intel deemed it not profitable to keep ads on gamasutra, so they removed them.

Leigh Alexander is the reason the ads got pulled right? She hasn't been a very democratic voice in the past, insulting people and refusing to have a reasonable discussion. If she behaved like a proper human being the ads wouldn't have been pulled. Do you think big companies like intel would dare to pull the ads if the only reason they had was that the website had feminist writers who dislike the direction video games is heading in? Bottom line is that she hasn't been for having a discussion ever. She's just spreading misinformation and pissing people off. She has no place in the public sphere.

[QUOTE=meazum;46139246]I figured as much, the issue with doing a thing related to or out of gamer gate is, as I said that it is at least a movement of some kind, the burden of being in a mob does not fall upon the opposition the same way, because they never were, even if they got influenced by the same people as each other, they never explicitly all banded together under one flag to do anything. If it isn't obvious yet, I'm not a GG booster at all. I just believe there are some of you who have very legitimate concerns, and that you shouldn't have to be dismissed the way I'm afriad you will be.[/QUOTE] If people are going to dismiss someone's argument because they support a hash tag then why do I even wanna discuss anything with them? They're clearly demonstrating a lack of aptitude in reasoning skills so it's likely whatever my arguments may be they won't accept it. [QUOTE]I know you probably feel this is the best way to revolt against what you perceive as an oppressive system or movement, but this kind of organised strike against editorial content is very un-democratic, regardless of whether the person deserves it or not.[/QUOTE] Editorial content is not supposed to be just stating your opinions. It's supposed to be an analysis of facts and then you bring in your expertise in the subject matter to explain those facts in an objective manner. And by objective manner I mean, not ignoring facts that disagree with your personal views and not twisting facts to agree with your personal views. You don't take facts to support your opinions and ignore ones that don't. When you're not doing it your job right and people don't trust you anymore as a journalist they have every right to complain about it and to be upset, especially if said writer is attacking them.

[QUOTE=CcZero;46139654]Leigh Alexander is the reason the ads got pulled right? She hasn't been a very democratic voice in the past, insulting people and refusing to have a reasonable discussion. If she behaved like a proper human being the ads wouldn't have been pulled.[/QUOTE] I don't know the extent of her refusal to engage people with opposing views it's very possible she has flat out said no to everybody. I'll just say twitter callouts is not a terrific way to engage anybody, so if that is what has been happening I don't blame her. Again, I have to clarify that I am more willing to doubt the more anonymous mob simply out of my experience with the so-called online disinhibition effect, and I believe a fear of it lies at the center of all this avoidance on the part of the anti-GG people. Call me optimistic, but I have always perceived Leigh as fairly professional when she wants to be, and I don't think she would be unwilling to take a discussion if it was clearly framed by a writer who is to some degree visible, and without an obvious angry slant against her. These may seem like unreasonable requirements, but it's worth thinking about what each part has to lose in a situation like this. I wouldn't take that argument to her simply because I wasn't bothered by the articles about bros and gamers (I try not to feel offended by any accusations that would fit me, because I know first hand it's a tiny tiny fraction of the bullshit queer and minority people put up with. Nobody should have to, but it's difficult to avoid apparently.) But I can also understand anybody in her position would try not to engage with what looks like a mob. It always is a mob situation to the accused, even when it is put across by a single youtuber, whenever TotalBiscuit brings something up, his myriad anonymous boosters will go along with it. Even if these feminist or "SJW" voices are visible on several video game sites, they don't have the same kind of fan push behind them covering their back, mostly other public people willing to take their fight. After all, Leigh is famous in exactly the same circles she is hated, which means she has everything to lose there, TotalBiscuit has very little to lose from something dumb he says on twitter, and while he may not appreciate what his Cynical Fleet gets up to, there is very little he can do to stop them. These are also very hard things to prove whether she may have been avoidant or not, much like the supposed silencing. I don't really believe it specifically was meant to silence the opposition, I believe the moderators may have had good reasons for doing it. It's all about what seems reasonable. I think most of my points boil down to me believing people when they say they have received abuse, and me being against any public mob. And that is why neither I, nor you, are likely to change our minds.

[QUOTE]I think most of my points boil down to me believing people when they say they have received abuse, and me being against any public mob. And that is why neither I, nor you, are likely to change our minds. [/QUOTE] Anyone who has an audience gets harrassed. From youtubers to game developers to actors to musicians. Everyone who has a sizable amount of people listening to them will get harassed, receives death threats and so on. This doesn't make it okay, but it's part of the job and it's expected that people in such positions understand how to deal with this (by ignoring it). Complaining about harassment will never end it and only further divides people into picking sides . If you don't care that they are being harassed then you get accused of supporting harassers because apathy apparently means you're just as guilty. Obviously this upsets people because they're being guilt tripped into supporting something, and people tend to react instinctively negatively towards guilt tripping, which means the situation escalates further into what's happening right now. As someone in a position of power, complaining about harassment will achieve absolutely nothing and will further make the situation worse.

I'm personally hoping that more advertising companies pull their ads from the more popular gaming sites, and intel was just getting the snowball rolling. Although i'm not quite sure if some smaller advertisers have already pulled out of the sites already. Hurting the reviewers in the hip pocket is the only way to "win" this thing.

[QUOTE=meazum;46140024]I think most of my points boil down to me believing people when they say they have received abuse, and me being against any public mob. And that is why neither I, nor you, are likely to change our minds.[/QUOTE] After reading your last post I assumed your point was that it was undemocratic to shut her out of the discussion, which I disagreed with. [QUOTE=meazum;46140024]I think most of my points boil down to me believing people when they say they have received abuse, and me being against any public mob. And that is why neither I, nor you, are likely to change our minds.[/QUOTE] If you're against any public mob you shouldn't defend an individual that's refusing to take the debate. She has a mob behind her too, it might not seem like it this time since her mob is smaller than the opposing one, and she's keeping it alive by refusing to acknowledge the actual problems. She's literally trying to simplify the whole thing to (some) gamers hating women.

Many major news corporations are siding with feminists over recent Intel ad pullout, started posting them about 2 hours ago, claiming that the people who emailed Intel are censoring opinions. This is what some think gamergate is (which although I agree with, I don't think its about.) [quote]We've got years of social justice ideologies, largely radical-feminist rhetoric, once thought safely contained within small blogging communities such as Tumblr, becoming more and more prevalent within games reporting.[/quote]

[QUOTE=meazum;46139191]I'm back, hello. Just figured I'd say this: I believe a lot of people on the other side never had any intention of positioning themselves for or against this movement, but felt inclined to shoot it down when they see it because of their friends' experiences, or things like the astroturfing of writers they appreciate. The thought of this as a movement and an opposing movement isn't fully true, even though a lot of people operate out of the same pastebin documents, Anti-gamer gate is not a movement the same way gamer gate is, and gamer gate is not a movement the same way even occupy is. I know this may sound like a cheap thing to say, but those of you with legitimate concern about the business would probably do much better if you started something else and took off on your own path completely.[/QUOTE] That's not quite correct I think... all movements are made up of people who have slightly differing opinions and motivations, and possibly vastly differing ones outside the topic at hand, who are unified by a common goal. Occupy has both people who are running out of money and some people who are at least fairly well off, and they fight under the same banner because they oppose the same kind of under-regulated trading done by banks. What unites GamerGate is love for video games and/or opposition to skewed reporting, and these issues are very closely entwined here, to the point where it's impossible to talk about one without the other. Supporting one of them equals opposing the other at this point, in this context. (The stuff about Quinn being abusive is completely detached by comparison, in the same way that Gjoni is not really taking a side in the conflict.) I think it's a good idea to work with others towards a common goal as long as you don't follow them off your own path. GamerGate supporters have been doing pretty well at this, considering that the amount of sexism and political agendas coming from this side is pretty much background noise. You still have people who are pushing their "evil liberals" and misogynist ideas, but if you check more carefully they are either trolling or have been doing that before and others generally don't follow up or actively oppose them. Same with misandry and anti-conservative stuff coming from the social justice communities, except that seems to be rarely acknowledged or denounced by those groups. (I [I]suspect[/I] that there's a lot of in-group/out-group thinking going on, at least where people believe themselves to be in and flourish in their victim or atoning position.) [QUOTE=meazum;46139246]I figured as much, the issue with doing a thing related to or out of gamer gate is, as I said that it is at least a movement of some kind, the burden of being in a mob does not fall upon the opposition the same way, because they never were, even if they got influenced by the same people as each other, they never explicitly all banded together under one flag to do anything. If it isn't obvious yet, I'm not a GG booster at all. I just believe there are some of you who have very legitimate concerns, and that you shouldn't have to be dismissed the way I'm afriad you will be.[/QUOTE] It depends on how you look at it. I think misappropriated feminism is a pretty strong banner. Personally I can say I fully align with GamerGate as a whole here, because it's an intersection of all the topics I care most about (with the exception of physics, but that's hard science and at most extremely tangentially related :v:). I really do love games, and I really do detest the misinformation and baseless hatred that's thrown around (and opposing the latter [I]is[/I] a core aim of GamerGate, it just happens to be "feminists" who are responsible for the vast majority of it and shooting it at everyone who dares to not 100% agree with them or be "privileged" in some manner). By Emma Watson's definition I'm also a feminist (I do care a lot about equal opportunities), but I'm probably not going call myself that without a huge disclaimer as long as the term is completely taken over by people who are in reality very sexist or pulling strings only to get into and remain in a position of power over others, and those who follow them blindly. You're free to pick from my opinion what you like and disregard or oppose the rest, but I won't serve it in an incomplete manner just to make myself look better. [QUOTE]Also, with regards to the intel thing, I don't think it's fully fair of them to pull advertisements based on content. If a site is expected to appease its advertisers, that severely limits the possibility for engaged critical writing. I know you probably feel this is the best way to revolt against what you perceive as an oppressive system or movement, but this kind of organised strike against editorial content is very un-democratic, regardless of whether the person deserves it or not. (Please don't equate this with advertisers not wanting to advertise on porn sites or torrent sites, that is a different issue about different content.)[/QUOTE] I think sites publishing baseless slander and fabricated views actually are very similar to porn and torrent sites, in this regard. There's a huge amount of disgust for both of it which is why reputable firms don't want to be associated with it. If a site doesn't publish completely one-sided (as in misrepresenting) or slanderous pieces there's not going to be a call for pulling advertising (unlike the opposite way around I should add, [I]The Sarkeesian Effect[/I]'s Patreon was attacked similarly but since it's not actually in breach of any ethics or other guidelines nothing came from that). The Escapist [URL="http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/editorials/12223-The-Escapist-Publisher-Issues-Public-Statement-on-Gamergate"]published a long publisher's note[/URL] and [URL="http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/editorials/12223-The-Escapist-Publisher-Issues-Public-Statement-on-Gamergate.5"]updated their ethics guidelines[/URL] to fix the problems in their network, and since then I haven't seen anyone from this side of the argument decry them. You're trying to frame character assassination as legitimate thing to do again in this part of your post, and that's something I very strongly disagree with. There's simply nothing constructive about it, and nothing to be gained from that for either the receiving or sending side.

[QUOTE=FangLargo;46139054]Apart from the Eron case (which isn't looking very good), I can't imagine a satisfying 'win' scenario, if there is one. It probably won't look 'good', but one thing we might be able to do is simply ignore GamerGate all together. Look forward. Now that I think about it, what do I care if people support aloof Social Justice Developers and Social Justice Narrators, and such like? As long as the [I]good[/I] games are being supported else where in the magnitude they deserve, I don't care what those other people do. Basically, it's that poverty vs equality argument. Does equality matter if no one lived in poverty? If good developers are getting good support, monetary and recognition, from gamers, if by YouTubers or guerrilla journalism, does it matter if other jerks are getting coverage by the likes of Kotaku and Polygon? It's not fair, but I hope it won't matter. Not to say that the abuse aspect of LW's scandal should be ignored. Abuse is always wrong, and I can only hope that Eron gets the justice he deserves.[/QUOTE] I wish we could just ignore it all, but we can't. Take a look at the Wikipedia article about GamerGate. Note how terrible it is. Wikipedia's mods being total SJWs doesn't help, but the real problem is that the majority of "journalists" have firmly sided against GG and because of Wikipedia's rules on sources, that's the story that gets told. Problem is, the whole fucking thing [B]is a revolt against garbage journalism[/B]. At a bare minimum, GamerGate can't die until people get the story right. And when you're fighting fucking journalists of all people, that's going to take a while. [QUOTE=Wii60;46138127][video=youtube;Rouq-VdgXdo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rouq-VdgXdo[/video][/QUOTE] I know there isn't some grand conspiracy to kill off gaming and gamer identities, but this video (and a few other things I've seen) prove that some feminists have had their hearts set on this fight for a long time. [QUOTE=meazum;46140024]I think most of my points boil down to me believing people when they say they have received abuse, and me being against any public mob. And that is why neither I, nor you, are likely to change our minds.[/QUOTE] I have been reluctant to say anything to you since you got here, but frankly I'm tired of you. You clearly did not come here to argue in good faith. If you're absolutely not going to change your mind and you're not going to post useful shit that isn't just concern trolling, why do you bother posting here?

dont know if anyone has posted this yet but goddamn all my favorite websites are becoming shit. RIP Cracked RIP Vice [img]http://puu.sh/bXEzv/18af951e84.jpg[/img]

Is there a reason this thread has stopped bumping?

I just had an interesting article pop up on Google now. "Intel buckles to anti-feminist campaign" by The Verge. Recommended to readers of anandtech. I think Google needs to sort this correlation.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;46140441]I wish we could just ignore it all, but we can't. Take a look at the Wikipedia article about GamerGate. Note how terrible it is. Wikipedia's mods being total SJWs doesn't help, but the real problem is that the majority of "journalists" have firmly sided against GG and because of Wikipedia's rules on sources, that's the story that gets told. Problem is, the whole fucking thing [B]is a revolt against garbage journalism[/B]. [/QUOTE] Wikipedia isn't controlled by SJW's, Wikipedia has had this issue for a LONG time. ANY political issue is controlled by a single or multiple moderators, usually from a focus group on Wikipedia, which THEY choose what articles are "reliable" or "trustworthy." Of course they have sources, but they are the sources they choose, and remove any others. You will notice that on the gamergate article they choose blog/opinion articles but choose to remove stuff like Milo despite being an opinion/blog piece as well. What happens is, usually after a year or two, a moderator from a different section will come along and rewrite the entire article when not as many people are focused on it, I used to edit for Wikipedia for a long time and this issue was very primary. They attempted to create councils in order to stop it, but there are simply too many articles to manage, and usually end up putting one (biased) person to editing. Wikipedia, when it comes to articles that it is impossible to have experts on, is incredibly biased and use the sources the moderator chooses. There are a lot of sources that Wikipedia could be choosing (techcrunch for example.) [QUOTE=Heldure;46140465]dont know if anyone has posted this yet but goddamn all my favorite websites are becoming shit. RIP Cracked RIP Vice [/QUOTE] Vice and cracked have always been like that. Vice News is what your looking for when it comes to good Vice. Both are click-bait sites.

I think most of this was addressed previously, so I'll just pull a tiny fraction out of the post to comment on it: [QUOTE=meazum;46140024][...] (I try not to feel offended by any accusations that would fit me, because I know first hand it's a tiny tiny fraction of the bullshit queer and minority people put up with. Nobody should have to, but it's difficult to avoid apparently.) [...][/QUOTE] [URL="http://mindlesszombiestudios.com/content/gamergate-you-can-call-me-shield"]That's a really harmful attitude, and it's both self-destructive and passively supporting the kind of hateful "privilege"-based discrimination we keep seeing poison every discussion on the topic of social justice or equality.[/URL] (There's also [URL="http://mindlesszombiestudios.com/content/gamergate-shields-education"]a follow-up[/URL] I haven't read yet.) If there's something you don't agree with you should speak up about it, even if you think other people have more important problems. No-one is a wholly good or bad person, and people who normally do good in someone's eyes still shouldn't get away with hurting them. (Neither should the good that bad people do be disregarded, but I suppose that's a different matter.)

[QUOTE=Heldure;46140465]dont know if anyone has posted this yet but goddamn all my favorite websites are becoming shit. RIP Cracked RIP Vice [img]http://puu.sh/bXEzv/18af951e84.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] VICE have always been fairly shit outside of war coverage and their videos on weird subcultures. Their normal coverage is pretty sensationalised. That article is a great example, VICE aren't actually in favour of anything like that or suffering from "feminist" tainting, they are merely reporting on a comment from somebody (who also said "no this is dumb") and using a provocative headline. [QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46140391]Many major news corporations [B]are siding with feminists[/B] over recent Intel ad pullout, started posting them about 2 hours ago, claiming that the people who emailed Intel are censoring opinions. This is what some think gamergate is (which although I agree with, I don't think its about.)[/QUOTE] Considering there are feminists in the GG movement, this is pretty fucking meaningless.

[QUOTE=Heldure;46140465]dont know if anyone has posted this yet but goddamn all my favorite websites are becoming shit. RIP Cracked RIP Vice [img]http://puu.sh/bXEzv/18af951e84.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Terrible click bait title but the article itself pretty much just says "no it wouldn't"

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;46140441] I have been reluctant to say anything to you since you got here, but frankly I'm tired of you. You clearly did not come here to argue in good faith. If you're absolutely not going to change your mind and you're not going to post useful shit that isn't just concern trolling, why do you bother posting here?[/QUOTE] I'm sorry you feel that way, please believe me when I say I didn't come here to derail your debate. Any concern I've shown has been real, as I believe many of you may be sincerely concerned with these issues. I think I'll leave this topic because today I don't feel my arguments are doing me much good, I'm feeling a little sloppy, actually. So as a final note I figure I might add that this movement is political, regardless of if it wants to be or not. These are largely reactionary attitudes with regards to the culture surrounding video games, from people who feel they have been sleighted by the media. You are engaging in a political debate when you engage with this, as you always do when debating what is just or what is correct, which is at the core of a debate that is concerned with how the media treats you and your opinion. I hope some of you change your minds, because I don't believe this situation will end up like you want. Change happens gradually, we have to accept that even though sometimes we may not like it at first. See you around maybe.

[QUOTE=meazum;46140771]I'm sorry you feel that way, please believe me when I say I didn't come here to derail your debate. Any concern I've shown has been real, as I believe many of you may be sincerely concerned with these issues. I think I'll leave this topic because today I don't feel my arguments are doing me much good, I'm feeling a little sloppy, actually. So as a final note I figure I might add that this movement is political, regardless of if it wants to be or not. These are largely reactionary attitudes with regards to the culture surrounding video games, from people who feel they have been sleighted by the media. You are engaging in a political debate when you engage with this, as you always do when debating what is just or what is correct, which is at the core of a debate that is concerned with how the media treats you and your opinion. I hope some of you change your minds, because I don't believe this situation will end up like you want. Change happens gradually, we have to accept that even though sometimes we may not like it at first. See you around maybe.[/QUOTE] This is precisely the kind of "not evaluating opposing views"/non-arguing that ticks me off... Well at least in your case you've been up front about it from the beginning so I'm not too angry (but I absolutely can't accept it, or even tolerate it well). Makes me a bit sick tbh, and that doesn't happen much.

[QUOTE=Heldure;46140465]dont know if anyone has posted this yet but goddamn all my favorite websites are becoming shit. RIP Cracked RIP Vice [img]http://puu.sh/bXEzv/18af951e84.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I'll truly never understand how ViceNews is related to the garbage that is Vice. In fact, ViceNews is an offshoot of Vice! Truly bizarre.

[QUOTE=Teddybeer;46140509]Because general discussion sorts differently.[/QUOTE] [img]http://i.cubeupload.com/LGhKuH.png[/img]

[QUOTE=meazum;46140771]I'm sorry you feel that way, please believe me when I say I didn't come here to derail your debate. Any concern I've shown has been real, as I believe many of you may be sincerely concerned with these issues. I think I'll leave this topic because today I don't feel my arguments are doing me much good, I'm feeling a little sloppy, actually. So as a final note I figure I might add that this movement is political, regardless of if it wants to be or not. These are largely reactionary attitudes with regards to the culture surrounding video games, from people who feel they have been sleighted by the media. You are engaging in a political debate when you engage with this, as you always do when debating what is just or what is correct, which is at the core of a debate that is concerned with how the media treats you and your opinion. I hope some of you change your minds, because I don't believe this situation will end up like you want. Change happens gradually, we have to accept that even though sometimes we may not like it at first. See you around maybe.[/QUOTE] It's hardly political, it's become nothing more than one group trying to remove another because people who are having their corrupt careers threatened are convincing their mobs that idiots represent the entire movement. And that's boiling it down if you don't count the equality aspect of it. In fact forget political, the entire thing is a social debate. [editline]3rd October 2014[/editline] And no, you're not convincing anyone that it's going to go badly with nothing suggesting so.

[QUOTE=Thlis;46134459]CNN ireport is now misogynist [url]http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1175414[/url][/QUOTE] While we're talking about journalism and quality can I just say... [quote]Recently a consumer outrage made Intel Corporation remove it’s advertisements from gaming website Gamasutra.[/quote] First goddamn sentence. "Recently a consumer outrage made Intel Corporation remove it is (or it has,) advertisements..." If it's a forum post or a tweet or something I don't care but these people are paid to write.

[QUOTE=01271;46141160][img]http://i.cubeupload.com/LGhKuH.png[/img][/QUOTE] Or install this userscript; [url]https://greasyfork.org/scripts/3814-facepunch-gd-forum-sort-fix[/url] The forum was changed to this weird ass sort due to the language-specific threads taking up the entire first page. KInda annoying, but manageable at least.

6 days till this thunderclap launches. [URL="https://www.thunderclap.it/projects/17127-gamergate?locale=en"]https://www.thunderclap.it/projects/17127-gamergate?locale=en [/URL][quote]146% of goal supported[/quote] The mirror is hosting a vote on the purpose of gamergate [url]http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/technology/one-simple-test-tell-you-4372864[/url]

[QUOTE=Thlis;46141407]6 days till this thunderclap launches. [URL="https://www.thunderclap.it/projects/17127-gamergate?locale=en"]https://www.thunderclap.it/projects/17127-gamergate?locale=en [/URL] The mirror is hosting a vote on the purpose of gamergate [url]http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/technology/one-simple-test-tell-you-4372864[/url][/QUOTE] The Mirror: king of the British tabloids when it comes to jumping the gun.