Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread. - General

Wait, so brianna is a trans woman? How come we needed to know that tho

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376266]Wait, so brianna is a trans woman? How come we needed to know that tho[/QUOTE] Not really relevant. That entire info dump confirmed one thing, that Brianna is a fucking crazy,terrible person, but we already knew that.

Hey guys, we don't celebrate it here but happy skeleton war to whoever does.

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376266]Wait, so brianna is a trans woman? How come we needed to know that tho[/QUOTE] So we can put her into the same "men hating" group that already consists of people like Katherine Cross and Samantha Allen.

I honestly don't know the answer to this but who is wu I've never heard the name before Gamergate. Why's she relevant and how'd she come to be?

[QUOTE=Mecha Pirate;46376337]Hey guys, we don't celebrate it here but happy skeleton war to whoever does.[/QUOTE] I run a [url=theskeletonwar.tumblr.com]blog[/url] for that! Anyway, no more off-topic.

I snipped that because it's a big post about how she used to be a man and how gross and terrible she is and it's not relevant at all and just serves as a big ol personal attack/will be spun as a doxx on our part her current actions are what's relevant, not who she used to be. but okay, dudes, just put it back. sure.

[QUOTE=G-Strogg;46375441]I don't like generalising but I really do think that SJWs don't really care about the minorities they claim to support, it's more an internalised will to stay relevant as a white majority. I'd argue they're the MOST racist people of our time.[/QUOTE] Therefore, we should stop calling them SJWs. Because the "social justice" in their "social justice warrior" title isn't utilized at all. In fact, knowing that Gamergate has opened charities, stabbed Gawker real good when they chose to dig their own grave, and that people are going around stopping people from harassing the opposing women, I'd say a lot of people supporting Gamergate demonstrated social justice far more than they have. We have become more SJW than they ever wanted. then again, posting personal info about Wu kind of contradicts that now.

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376366]I honestly don't know the answer to this but who is wu I've never heard the name before Gamergate. Why's she relevant and how'd she come to be?[/QUOTE] Free publicity from a death threat with suspicious source and a shit game. The game has scantily clad white women only for characters but it's the creator that matters :^)

[QUOTE=Rusty100;46376385]I snipped that because it's a big post about how she used to be a man and how gross and terrible she is and it's not relevant at all and just serves as a big ol personal attack/will be spun as a doxx on our part her current actions are what's relevant, not who she used to be. but okay, dudes, just put it back. sure.[/QUOTE] Gonna have to agree with the Judge on this one. I don't think it's relevant what she used to be and it shows a big sign of disrespect for trans people to refer them as what they weren't comfortable being. Regardless of whether or not you personally think she's shitty, slandering her is why people hate us already. We want to claim that we're about ethics then we need to act like it.

Just because we have no one from the 'opposing side' willing to engage in a proper debate doesn't me we should allow ourselves slipping into an echo chamber. I encourage people to be the devil's avocado if they feel the need to be.

that post is TMZ material at best. real ethical.

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376366]I honestly don't know the answer to this but who is wu I've never heard the name before Gamergate. Why's she relevant and how'd she come to be?[/QUOTE] Literally did a Zoe Quinn. Look it up on ED, but the short version, she appereantly got death threats(which were probably fake, didn't mention GG at all, and she was caught red handed about faking another threat to her), after trying to piss of people with a shitty image macro, and rode on the back of that to promote her game (Which looks a shitty mass effect clone with Reboot graphics). I agree with snipping the info, it's not relevant at all, we already knew that she's a schmuck. The "dox" on her are availiable to anyone who knows how to google, and I doubt anyone from here would use this in a wrong way. Anyways, a "followup" on the whole we own you thing [IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1RGl0KCcAAvnsr.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376435]Gonna have to agree with the Judge on this one. I don't think it's relevant what she used to be and it shows a big sign of disrespect for trans people to refer them as what they weren't comfortable being. Regardless of whether or not you personally think she's shitty, slandering her is why people hate us already. We want to claim that we're about ethics then we need to act like it.[/QUOTE] Once more, the transgenderism is, for me, irrelevant. For all intents and purposes, Brianna Wu is a woman, and who am I to say otherwise? I don't care what gender she identifies with now or before. The real value of that post was the claims of mental instability and past actions, which allow us to understand current happenings better. Also pretty sure noone is playing "shame the trans" in this thread, and such behaviour is frowned upon not only here but everywhere GG is a thing being taken seriously.

The sad truth is, if someone is a shitty person due to trauma or mental issues, they are still ultimately a shitty person.

Actually i honestly think that post should stay removed. It's deliberately attacking her, not for any reason related to what we are fighting. Having a dox up there will only cause more harm in the longterm.

I guess. Still doesn't sit right with me, you know? As dumb as this can possibly sound I feel if we judge Brianna for anything it should be what she's made to the public as stuff she's said in interviews. Her personal life isn't my business. It still seems intentionally slanderous.

[QUOTE=ZuXer;46376464] [IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1RGl0KCcAAvnsr.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] Yeah. "Hey niggers, if some white people didn't fight for your freedom you'd still be slaves, so shut the fuck up about segregation".

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376494]I guess. Still doesn't sit right with me, you know? As dumb as this can possibly sound I feel if we judge Brianna for anything it should be what she's made to the public as stuff she's said in interviews. Her personal life isn't my business. It still seems intentionally slanderous.[/QUOTE] I understand your points, and it doesn't even possibly sound dumb. But there's a very thin line between slander and reporting, which I believe this is best labeled as. I believe it'd be slander if anyone was directly attacking her in regards to current events, but what that thread revealed was past odd and questionable behaviour, which helps explain Brianna's need to constantly put herself on the limelight. But yes, it's sad that all info's wrapped in a little pretty immoral "SHE'S A MAN" package, which causes everyone to frown over it. Edit: I suggest that we focus on the details of that thread that matter, and decry and distance ourselves from the details that don't. Which details matter, however, is more of a personal analysis than anything, and I argue that that choice should be made at a personal level. Information is free, by acting as gatekeepers to hold a narrative straight makes us as bad as the media we're fighting again (as flamboyant a claim as that might be)

[QUOTE=ZuXer;46376464] Anyways, a "followup" on the whole we own you thing [IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1RGl0KCcAAvnsr.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] Talk about delusional.

[QUOTE=gudman;46376534]Yeah. "Hey niggers, if some white people didn't fight for your freedom you'd still be slaves, so shut the fuck up about segregation".[/QUOTE] Pretty much.

I also liked scaremongering. WE ARE THE LAST BASTION OF YOUR RIGHTS, IF WE DISAPPEAR, [b]THEY[/b] WILL LYNCH YOU! I must've heard it somewhere. Hm. Okay, I get it that it's just some delusional asshole who represents leftist movements not much more than I do (and I'm not a leftist in any way imaginable), but man, do some people really think this way?

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376266]Wait, so brianna is a trans woman? How come we needed to know that tho[/QUOTE] That's not the relevant part, the restraining order and general aggressiveness are though considering it's harassment she accuses others of at even the slightest semblance of disagreement. [QUOTE=Teddybeer;46376320]Or could have experienced her youth as traumatic and hasn't searched the right people to talk to and now is a bit overcompensating.[/QUOTE] Considering those tweets about her parents financing some business of hers? Probably not too traumatic if they are in that good standing and she had no problem with accepting the money. If she was overcompensating for being privileged then taking the money makes no sense at all, and if she was compensating for being victimised I'd expect any at least partially reasonable person to act entirely differently. There's no way she isn't using this primarily for self-promotion (and quite clumsily so if she targets the average person), in addition to not having qualms about attacking others. Maybe she's self-promoting inside her echo chamber though, considering that she was afaik pretty much unknown compared to almost everyone else.

[QUOTE=ZuXer;46376464]Literally did a Zoe Quinn. Look it up on ED, but the short version, she appereantly got death threats(which were probably fake, didn't mention GG at all, and she was caught red handed about faking another threat to her), after trying to piss of people with a shitty image macro, and rode on the back of that to promote her game (Which looks a shitty mass effect clone with Reboot graphics). I agree with snipping the info, it's not relevant at all, we already knew that she's a schmuck. The "dox" on her are availiable to anyone who knows how to google, and I doubt anyone from here would use this in a wrong way. Anyways, a "followup" on the whole we own you thing [IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1RGl0KCcAAvnsr.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] "But they'd be totally disorganized and impotent without the intellectual frameworks we supplied" That strikes me as just ever so slightly arrogant and conceited

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376435]Gonna have to agree with the Judge on this one. I don't think it's relevant what she used to be and it shows a big sign of disrespect for trans people to refer them as what they weren't comfortable being. Regardless of whether or not you personally think she's shitty, slandering her is why people hate us already. We want to claim that we're about ethics then we need to act like it.[/QUOTE] [I]Technically[/I] it's not slander if it's true. That aside yes, it's only directly relevant if she currently accuses others of the things she's doing herself (which does appear to be the case in some parts, though).

[QUOTE=Sitkero;46376649]"But they'd be totally disorganized and impotent without the intellectual frameworks we supplied" That strikes me as just ever so slightly arrogant and conceited[/QUOTE] Literally the PC version of "white man's burden"

[URL="http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20141027VL200.html"]DigiTimes: Commentary: Calculating the cost of GamerGate, many losers, 2 potential big winners[/URL] I haven't read all of it yet but it seems interesting.

[QUOTE=Tamschi;46376699][URL="http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20141027VL200.html"]DigiTimes: Commentary: Calculating the cost of GamerGate, many losers, 2 potential big winners[/URL] I haven't read all of it yet but it seems interesting.[/QUOTE] With under 10,000 participants (twitter count only) it's unlikely it will have an economic effect. However, this is not counting inactive users who are not on twitter, which is estimated anywhere from 10,000 to 100,000. Viewers and not active participants are currently at 21 million in the past two months. This was before BBC/CR though. [editline]a[/editline] IGN On ethics [quote=Tal Blevins][I]However, this [Email sent to them] is good timing on your part as this is a subject we've been talking about internally for a bit and we're already in the process of updating IGN with a permanent, public outline of our standards and practices, so look for that soon. [/I][I]Thanks again for checking in and know that ethics and professionalism is something that we take very seriously at IGN. We all have a passion for the subjects we cover -- from movies to television, comics to games -- but we also understand the significance of our responsibility to IGN's readers, so we hope that comes across in our coverage.[/I] [/quote] One of them should be [quote]Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity through crafting controversial headlines, [/quote] The BEST point.

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376435]Gonna have to agree with the Judge on this one. I don't think it's relevant what she used to be and it shows a big sign of disrespect for trans people to refer them as what they weren't comfortable being. Regardless of whether or not you personally think she's shitty, slandering her is why people hate us already. We want to claim that we're about ethics then we need to act like it.[/QUOTE] Same here, it is pretty irrelevant to the whole GamerGate situation.

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;46376266]Wait, so brianna is a trans woman? How come we needed to know that tho[/QUOTE] I thought that was plainly obvious We dont really need to know that, however it does affirm what many suspected about her and many of these prominent figureheads in "anti" GG or whatever the fuck you want to call it: they're fucking loony Thats not surprising to me in the least, but it is nice to have some affirmation. I also wouldn't be surprised to see more stories like this pop up, just as they did for Quinn's past. People who have a preoccupation with sex and violence and are constantly spouting paranoid delusions dont tend to be the most mentally stable people.