Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread. - General

[QUOTE=V12US;46683492]Haha, the admin of 8chan is an idiot. He got tricked into DDoSing the FBI.[/QUOTE] What?

[QUOTE=Mecha Pirate;46683509]What?[/QUOTE] - Some site gets raided by 8chan's /b/ board - The admin from the site getting raided sends Hotwheels a mail, telling him to stop the raids - Hotwheels posts the mail on 8chan's /b/, and instructs them not to raid (wink wink nudge nudge) - /b/tards start firing up their LOIC's - Turns out the admin knew that was going to happen, and the whole thing was just bait to get them to DDoS the feds - Hilarity ensues [url]http://archive.today/IxjC4[/url] Just goes to show that hubris is the most dangerous enemy of all, and none are immune to it. Never underestimate your enemies, no matter how dumb or stupid they may seem.

[QUOTE=V12US;46683618] Just goes to show that hubris is the most dangerous enemy of all, and none are immune to it. Never underestimate your enemies, no matter how dumb or stupid they may seem.[/QUOTE] What relevance does any of this have..?

[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46683639]What relevance does any of this have..?[/QUOTE] About as much relevance as most of the SJW shit in here. I'm just saying that you got to be very careful who you ally with in this GamerGate thing, because the louder and more important they seem, the bigger of a jackass they tend to turn out to be. This goes for both sides of the movement. I wanted to say argument, but there's barely any argument. The whole thing devolved into shit flinging a long time ago. Someone who tries to get to the bottom of things has to wade through a mile of solid shit to get to the actual core, which may be a reason why the media seems so one sided. Perhaps in a couple of decades, archaeologists will breach the shit layer, and they'll find out the gamers were right. But by then, it'll probably be too late.

[QUOTE=V12US;46683688]About as much relevance as most of the SJW shit in here. I'm just saying that you got to be very careful who you ally with in this GamerGate thing, because the louder and more important they seem, the bigger of a jackass they tend to turn out to be. This goes for both sides of the movement. I wanted to say argument, but there's barely any argument. The whole thing devolved into shit flinging a long time ago. Someone who tries to get to the bottom of things has to wade through a mile of solid shit to get to the actual core, which may be a reason why the media seems so one sided. Perhaps in a couple of decades, archaeologists will breach the shit layer, and they'll find out the gamers were right. But by then, it'll probably be too late.[/QUOTE] 8chan does not represent me. This thread doesn't represent me. I represent me. If these people are giving us a bad name then you have the duty to make us -yourself- have a good name. Do good, and others won't notice - convince others to do good, and they will notice. You do everything in your power to represent yourself, remember : gamersgate isn't about having a leader or representative, the only reason we are in this mess is because they label us based on the actions of the anonymous, while they are in it because they idolize the factually and morally wrong. The less this thread, you and me, stop worrying about what other people did and look at what [I]we[/I] are doing - we'll get farther and do more. It's a consumer movement - not a hate group - and as long as voices of reason stand out we will continue moving.

[QUOTE=V12US;46683618]- Some site gets raided by 8chan's /b/ board - The admin from the site getting raided sends Hotwheels a mail, telling him to stop the raids - Hotwheels posts the mail on 8chan's /b/, and instructs them not to raid (wink wink nudge nudge) - /b/tards start firing up their LOIC's - Turns out the admin knew that was going to happen, and the whole thing was just bait to get them to DDoS the feds - Hilarity ensues [url]http://archive.today/IxjC4[/url] Just goes to show that hubris is the most dangerous enemy of all, and none are immune to it. Never underestimate your enemies, no matter how dumb or stupid they may seem.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=V12US;46683492]Haha, the admin of 8chan is an idiot. He got tricked into DDoSing the FBI.[/QUOTE] Back to sensationalist headlines with you

[QUOTE=Wii60;46682308]archives of twitter above: [url]https://archive.today/B5i5g[/url] [url]https://archive.today/fzXHZ[/url] [url]https://archive.today/soCUF[/url] extras [url]https://twitter.com/ChuckCJohnson/status/542534605748711425[/url] [url]https://archive.today/G8mR0[/url] [url]https://archive.today/5Vqia[/url] [url]https://archive.today/NAIXF[/url] [editline]10th December 2014[/editline] 8chan thread that i quoted, forgot to add [url]https://8chan.co/gamergate/res/55272.html[/url][/QUOTE] Wow the harrassment that guy is getting is insane. Way to go Gawker, you are once again leading a harrassment campaign against ONE GUY

It's the media's fault for generalizing us in the first place. It's a fucking hashtag.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;46683871]Wow the harrassment that guy is getting is insane. Way to go Gawker, you are once again leading a harrassment campaign against ONE GUY[/QUOTE] Don't be silly, telling a bunch of people to go harass somebody isn't harassment! That only happens when a bunch of people disagree with you for a variety of reasons and/or think you're a jackass!

[QUOTE=Wii60;46682308]archives of twitter above: [url]https://archive.today/B5i5g[/url] [url]https://archive.today/fzXHZ[/url] [url]https://archive.today/soCUF[/url] extras [url]https://twitter.com/ChuckCJohnson/status/542534605748711425[/url] [url]https://archive.today/G8mR0[/url] [url]https://archive.today/5Vqia[/url] [url]https://archive.today/NAIXF[/url] [editline]10th December 2014[/editline] 8chan thread that i quoted, forgot to add [url]https://8chan.co/gamergate/res/55272.html[/url][/QUOTE] Hey, look who's joining in on the harassment. It is Anti-GG's biggest moral knight, A Man in Black. And he even created a hashtag purely to harass Johnson over a pic which isn't most likely even to be real. But sure, A Man in Black, gamergate is the harassment tag here, sure..... [url]https://archive.today/ZbK3o[/url] [url]https://archive.today/IDEFV[/url]

So, uh, Nick Denton is stepping down as head of Gawker [URL="http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2014/12/8558256/nick-denton-steps-down-gawker-president-names-seven-person-managing-bo"]http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2014/12/8558256/nick-denton-steps-down-gawker-president-names-seven-person-managing-bo[/URL]

[QUOTE=ZuXer;46685858]So, uh, Nick Denton is stepping down as head of Gawker [URL="http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2014/12/8558256/nick-denton-steps-down-gawker-president-names-seven-person-managing-bo"]http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2014/12/8558256/nick-denton-steps-down-gawker-president-names-seven-person-managing-bo[/URL][/QUOTE] [quote]Denton has named a seven-person managing board to run the site, which consists of: Denton himself, who will remain as C.E.O.[/quote] Hail Hydra

[QUOTE=ZuXer;46685858]So, uh, Nick Denton is stepping down as head of Gawker [URL="http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2014/12/8558256/nick-denton-steps-down-gawker-president-names-seven-person-managing-bo"]http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2014/12/8558256/nick-denton-steps-down-gawker-president-names-seven-person-managing-bo[/URL][/QUOTE] He's still the CEO though. [quote]Gawker owner Nick Denton is stepping down as president of Gawker Media and scaling back his day-to-day involvement in running the company, he announced in a memo to staff today. (Click here to skip to full text of the memo.) Denton has named a seven-person managing board to run the site, which consists of: Denton himself, who will remain as C.E.O.; president Heather Dietrick; chief strategy officer Erin Pettigrew; advertising head Andrew Gorenstein; chief operating officer Scott Kidder; and executive editor Tommy Craggs, previously the editor of Gawker Media's sports site Deadspin.[/quote] At least the others will reign him in when he tries to bully again.

[QUOTE=Ayane-152;46681264]One month ago: "Gamergate was started by a group of trolls you guys should drop the hashtag" Now: "Gamergate was started by ethic concerns, now it is just abunch evil misogynists" This is just good :v:[/QUOTE] "Some of the images are quite graphic" *cuts to a shot of brianna wu*

[img]http://puu.sh/dpoLk/8cfb432993.jpg[/img] [editline]10th December 2014[/editline] It's true that Gamergate moved a bit beyond the issue of journalism, not that I think it's bad, since it moved in the direction of us not wanting media to be censored.

[QUOTE=G-Strogg;46686297] It's true that Gamergate moved a bit beyond the issue of journalism, not that I think it's bad, since it moved in the direction of us not wanting media to be censored.[/QUOTE] It's more of a combination of all grievances with gaming at the moment, which is why other issues are brought up such as censorship of games, attempting to force feed politics into games, etc.

[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46686329]It's more of a combination of all grievances with gaming at the moment, which is why other issues are brought up such as censorship of games, attempting to force feed politics into games, etc.[/QUOTE] True. For me personally, it's the concept that gaming SHOULD be inclusive, but that would mean that thoughts and ideas wouldn't go censored, just because someone might be offended. No possible game could please everyone in the world. Again, with any game you'd consider offensive, just don't buy it. I personally don't consider any game offensive, but I don't buy games I don't like or want...the few times I did that I only ended up regretting it anyways.

Broteam doesn't even give a shit about gamergate and ethics in journalism he just fucking hates SJW ever since he experienced first hand what kind of dipshits they are

yet to be verified, but HP drops Polygon.com from ads.

I love how games like Bayonetta are criticised for featuring women with sexual characteristics, but I've heard basically nothing about that game developed by a bunch of literal Neo-Nazis for ages. Man, I can't wait for a game to come out with sexualised male characters. I'm sure that these anti-sexualisation people will be the first in line to speak out against it!

Now I feel kind of a giant asshole for suspecting that when she first showed up Mercedes Carrera was just in it to get some free publicity, it turns out she's a very intelligent and caring woman [video=youtube;nK0C40JON-Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK0C40JON-Q[/video] Gamergate, a pornstar and pakman in the same video. The LWs are going to throw a bitch fit of biblical proportions

Look, maybe since I'm attracted to women I'm not allowed to have an opinion on this matter. But personally, I don't think having sexualised women in games makes me any less capable of treating them like human beings. Yes, it might well be a bit of an issue- but it's endemic of a general problem in society, not a problem specific to video games. [editline]10th December 2014[/editline] Oops, automerge.

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;46686410]I love how games like Bayonetta are criticised for featuring women with sexual characteristics, but I've heard basically nothing about that game developed by a bunch of literal Neo-Nazis for ages. Man, I can't wait for a game to come out with sexualised male characters. I'm sure that these anti-sexualisation people will be the first in line to speak out against it![/QUOTE] There's a lot of inconsistencies with their arguments. They criticize all forms of female characters. Female characters who utilize sexuality are attacked for that, whether or not the character owns their sexuality or is being used by it, regardless of if a woman created the character, it's attacked for that. If a character has no sexuality in a female way, ala Vasquez from aliens, they're attacked for being men in womens bodys, so either polarity of sexuality is wrong, despite both existing and people choosing to exist those ways in the real world. If a character is strong, they're criticized for being too strong and thus not realistic. If they're weak, they're called out on that for being objects in the story unable to act on anything by being weak. Think about the criticisms of Lara croft. No representation has been considered correct yet. I try to think of what they want, but I can't. I've not watched enough of FemFrequencies critiques on films to make much of a statement about that, but at least no representation in video games is possible to satisfy people who agree with that view point.

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;46686427]Look, maybe since I'm attracted to women I'm not allowed to have an opinion on this matter. But personally, I don't think having sexualised women in games makes me any less capable of treating them like human beings. Yes, it might well be a bit of an issue- but it's endemic of a general problem in society, not a problem specific to video games.[/QUOTE] It's the biggest mistake anyone has made, the absolute association with sexualisation and objectification. The two are completely different issues and most sexualisation isn't an issue at all, but getting that message of nuance and complexity out through their networks is impossible, so you end up with garbage. [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46686471]No representation has been considered correct yet.[/QUOTE] The main character from Gone Home. A few things to be fair, not all feminists agree and when complaints are louder than praise it can seem like endless negativity. [url=https://twitter.com/spacekatgal/status/525848174498304001]Brianna Wu likes Bayonetta[/url] of all things and Sarkeesian seems content with new Lara and Faith from Mirror's Edge. The real problems start coming up when they don't have any disagreement and discussion over these things, they just hold their own definitions and although they are completely different from one another they act as if it's the same. It obscures any message, causes massive confusion over what they actually mean, causes nearly every argument to seem vague and empty, but it allows them to feed a narrative that everyone else is uninformed, this is especially true of Sarkeesian.

[QUOTE=G-Strogg;46686297][img]http://puu.sh/dpoLk/8cfb432993.jpg[/img] [editline]10th December 2014[/editline] It's true that Gamergate moved a bit beyond the issue of journalism, not that I think it's bad, since it moved in the direction of us not wanting media to be censored.[/QUOTE] The thing is SJ was the weapon wielded against us to poison the well and stop any actual discussion on ethics before it begins from day one, and all the sheer amount of harassment and disinformation used to silence people has become a bigger problem than the original issue.

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;46686410]Man, I can't wait for a game to come out with sexualised male characters.[/QUOTE] It already did. It's called the entire Metal Gear series. [img]http://i.imgur.com/A8yfFP5.jpg[/img] I would be legitimately shocked if there was someone who didn't notice it.

[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;46686622]It already did. It's called the entire Metal Gear series. [img]http://i.imgur.com/A8yfFP5.jpg[/img] I would be legitimately shocked if there was someone who didn't notice it.[/QUOTE] Made by men, so it'll be considered a male power fantasy instead. Yes, including the young, handsome, bishounen Raiden, because he has any kind of power at all.

[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;46686622]It already did. It's called the entire Metal Gear series. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/A8yfFP5.jpg[/IMG] I would be legitimately shocked if there was someone who didn't notice it.[/QUOTE] i saw a post on tublr saying quiet was a sexualized icon when BB himself can wear the same outfit quiet wears (bar fishnets and bottom bikini). Infact it doesnt take a moron to see the massive amount of homoeroticism inside the MGS/MGR series. Just really sick of people barging into series because they look at the cover and declare it something its not [B][I](especially since the boss herself was one of the most powerful characters in the fucking game and no one looked down on her for being a woman)[/I][/B].

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gz7Yimh-jc[/media]

[QUOTE=Wii60;46686391]yet to be verified, but HP drops Polygon.com from ads.[/QUOTE] The sauce? Why would a condiment be part of Polygon's adverting campaign?