Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread.
15,084 replies, posted
[img]http://i.imgur.com/n3qp3Vm.png[/img]
[url]https://twitter.com/PlayDangerously/status/545697363742846976[/url]
[url]https://archive.today/RiHS8[/url]
[editline]18th December 2014[/editline]
[url]http://archive.today/JoZXf[/url]
[quote]
[To a person who wrote an email] I strongly recommend that someone organize a "gamer's union" of sorts, with a real mission statement, with real rules, with real organization and leadership.
Bitching and moaning on a twitter hashtag is getting you nowhere.
--Jimmy Wales[/quote]
[quote]The contingent of people who are interested in putting pressure on institutions within game journalism to expose corruption need an actual organization - with a mission statement, with a board of directors, with elected people who represent the movement. Barring that, you should very much expect the media to continue to accurately report that the Gamergate community is associated with online harassment and misogyny. But actually, in fact, it is.[/quote]
Interesting - but who would really be willing to do such a thing?
from 2013 on /v/, someone predicted #Gamergate
[url]https://archive.moe/v/thread/202616031/#202616031[/url]
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46745693]Interesting - but who would really be willing to do such a thing?[/QUOTE]
No one hopefully, the idea of having "leaders" has been shot down so many times it's not even funny.
Our goals, and ideals are all available for everyone to read, transparency is part of the reason why this has lasted as long as it has, plus it opens up the flood gates for fresh ideas.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/1tje1p3.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Wii60;46745753]from 2013 on /v/, someone predicted #Gamergate
[url]https://archive.moe/v/thread/202616031/#202616031[/url][/QUOTE]
That's actually kind of an interesting theory. I had my own regarding movie games for a while. Basically, ads don't work on games because of the additional interactivity that exists. When people are active instead of passive (like when watching TV), the conversion rates are abysmally lower. This effectively makes ads completely ineffective in games, and this is lost money. Another thing to note about ads is that since 1920 they've changed from being technically oriented (listing the features of a product) to being emotion oriented. Instead of an ad just saying what it does, it tries to connect the product to some good emotion (sex, family, security, ...) to sell you that product.
So when you think about a game like Gone Home, isn't it the PERFECT type of game for ads? It's a game where interactivity is kept to a minimal, that tries to constantly put you in a higher emotional level and that has objects that you have to absolutely look at (that's the game pretty much) all the time. So a game like or variations on it would make the players more susceptible to ads, maybe.
[QUOTE=Wii60;46745854][img]http://i.imgur.com/1tje1p3.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
I almost feel bad for that guy because he's not as vicious as the average SJW- he's just really, really dumb
[QUOTE=Wii60;46745854][img]http://i.imgur.com/1tje1p3.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
If I was on the twitters with the tweets and knew how to whistle well I would tell him to find a therapist with along the lines to find out why he was an angry person and perhaps the people he associates with are the ones who made him an angry person.
[QUOTE=Jamsponge;46736454]Wikipedia is still a worthwhile endeavour. It's not the only source that somebody should trust for anything more than an info binge, no, but just because it can sometimes be wrong or biased doesn't mean that the whole thing goes down the drain. This is just what happens when something can be edited by anyone.[/QUOTE]
"edited by anyone" isn't the problem imo. It's the bureaucracy, rules, and favoritism. You read a wikipedia talk page and they're using tons of abbreviations that dont make any sense and intentionally making it harder for new editors to get involved. They ban people for being "SPAs" in bulk, but only when some senior editor is mad that people disagree with them. It'd be like if facepunch bulk banned new posters not for shit post content, but just for being new. Older members are given rediculous passes and they value their own flawed, exploitable rules over what those rules are supposed to do. Like, rylong keeps saying that all his own sources are reliable but no pro-ggers are, and HE is seen as a reliable source to make that judgement in the same way the sources he claims are reliable are seen, just due to age. No thought to conflict of interest or objectivity or even neutrality.
They are intentionally hostile to new editors and favor their in-group rather than experts on the subject. In other words... sickening nepotism, kinda. If your group of online wiki buddies counts as nepotism. if you look at their wiki user pages they're like fucking myspace blogs half the time with a bunch of stupid banners and shit, it's strange.
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46741741]"In an effort to stop this place from becoming too much of an echo chamber, I'd like you to answer a question: what is your criticism of GamerGate? (KotakuInAction)"
(bolded my own agreeances with the below poster.)
Too many people on here are guilty of the third point, seem to be more interested in "what the crazy feminists said" instead of actual corruption.
Good news :
Gawker has been editing their ethical policy, adding disclosure warnings to the bottom of advertised articles or if the author has a relationship with the article's subject, etc.
[URL]https://archive.today/ZPJkh[/URL]
[URL]https://archive.today/5v0IP[/URL]
Whether they admit it or not, we have done something clearly to affect them.[/QUOTE]
A lot of the pointing and laughing is why most people are still here: it's straight up entertaining. Hell, r/kotakuinaction and it's sister r/tumblrinaction's entire idea started as "make fun of this incredibly silly shit".
Does it further the argument directly? No, but it keeps people entertained and coming back, and considering most of it is contained to direct GG discussion places, it's probably alright to some extent. As long as the arguments and, for lack of a better term, inter-side discussion doesn't contain it.
[url]http://theralphretort.com/cloudflare-gives-out-theralphretort-info-backs-brianna-wu-121814/[/url]
well cloudflare you seem to be putting yourself in a pickle, but I don't know where this will go besides comments on privacy.
wait what, I don't understand...
[thumb]https://i.imgur.com/L2aGu3h.jpg[/thumb]
I just want to say : The Ralph Retort article showing everyone her house was COMPLETELY unacceptable (Google maps only, pictures/videos she posted doesn't matter), he should have not posted any pictures and kept it private. It does nothing but fuel ammunition for the opposition, all for a improbable conspiracy theory.
Am I saying he is wrong for posting those pictures? Not necessarily, I am more saying it can easily be twisted to being "Hes posting info about my house hes doxxing me!" ammo.
[editline]a[/editline]
That wikipedia article has turned into an edit warzone again, I expect a lock within a couple days. It flip flops all over the place.
It lasted roughly an hour after being unprotected.
I ask again - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - why is it covering current events with unreliable information?
The only information that I know of is that without a doubt Ryulong will be sanctioned from editing the Gamergate article (He admits to edit warring multiple times during the workshop) but I doubt that will change much. As far as I am concerned unless a """reliable""" source posts something good then the article is stuck on being heavily anti-gamersgate.
But when people start throwing the term around as any edits to the article as "misogynistic edits" somebody told me that might not go over well for them. (The vast majority of them are doing it.)
If they want to keep it neutral they honestly should have a section for "Mysgonisty accusations" and "Corruption accusations" and use their own sources instead of deleting eachothers shit.
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46746522]It does nothing but fuel ammunition for the opposition, all for a improbable conspiracy theory.[/QUOTE]
Improbable conspiracy theory? She admitted it's her house for christ sake!
[URL]https://archive.today/vXgvR[/URL]
If anything it was unnecessary because the images from the inside of the house already gave it away a while ago.
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46746522]Am I saying he is wrong for posting those pictures? Not necessarily, I am more saying it can easily be twisted to being "Hes posting info about my house hes doxxing me!" ammo.[/QUOTE]Fuck. That.
If they don't have ammo they create it out of thin air, if you want to go with that mentality then your only option is to just give up and not do anything at all.
Anything you do they'll use against you no matter the amount of olympic mental gymnastics required
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46746522]I just want to say : The Ralph Retort article showing everyone her house was COMPLETELY unacceptable (Google maps only, pictures/videos she posted doesn't matter), he should have not posted any pictures and kept it private. It does nothing but fuel ammunition for the opposition, all for a improbable conspiracy theory.
Am I saying he is wrong for posting those pictures? Not necessarily, I am more saying it can easily be twisted to being "Hes posting info about my house hes doxxing me!" ammo.
[editline]a[/editline]
That wikipedia article has turned into an edit warzone again, I expect a lock within a couple days. It flip flops all over the place.
It lasted roughly an hour after being unprotected.
I ask again - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - why is it covering current events with unreliable information?
The only information that I know of is that without a doubt Ryulong will be sanctioned from editing the Gamergate article (He admits to edit warring multiple times during the workshop) but I doubt that will change much. As far as I am concerned unless a """reliable""" source posts something good then the article is stuck on being heavily anti-gamersgate.
But when people start throwing the term around as any edits to the article as "misogynistic edits" somebody told me that might not go over well for them. (The vast majority of them are doing it.)
If they want to keep it neutral they honestly should have a section for "Mysgonisty accusations" and "Corruption accusations" and use their own sources instead of deleting eachothers shit.[/QUOTE]
One of the problems with the Wikipedia article is that Jimmy Wales appears to have steadfastly made his mind up about Gamergate and is opposed to it (whether this is based on misinformation or research he's done himself, who knows), so dissenters are being shut out. It ain't pretty.
[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;46746946]One of the problems with the Wikipedia article is that Jimmy Wales appears to have steadfastly made his mind up about Gamergate and is opposed to it (whether this is based on misinformation or research he's done himself, who knows), so dissenters are being shut out. It ain't pretty.[/QUOTE]
I guess the only thing we can do is start releasing swaths and swaths of abusive behavior from wikipedia editors beside Gamergate to show how partial they are.
[QUOTE=Wii60;46744880][img]http://i.imgur.com/n3qp3Vm.png[/img]
[url]https://twitter.com/PlayDangerously/status/545697363742846976[/url]
[url]https://archive.today/RiHS8[/url]
[editline]18th December 2014[/editline]
[url]http://archive.today/JoZXf[/url][/QUOTE]
[url]https://twitter.com/IdentInvalid/status/545698789365784576/photo/1[/url]
(the compression :suicide:
How often has that been reposted?)
Seriously though, I'm going to follow his blog somewhat closely.
(Even though it is a bit aggressive even for a lawyer's blog.)
...
In order to make this post actually worthwhile:
Despite being called "insecure" by the author due to not supporting it any more, TrueCrypt actually works really well.
Unfortunately German neo-nazis know this too, but if they do something illegal it's bound to create other traces so I'm not too worried.
(Uninformed angry people are more of an issue currently :/)
Also if you're in the UK you can be forced to reveal the password, thanks to some crazy reversal of the onus of proof.
[editline]19th December 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=adnzzzzZ;46745868]That's actually kind of an interesting theory. I had my own regarding movie games for a while. Basically, ads don't work on games because of the additional interactivity that exists. When people are active instead of passive (like when watching TV), the conversion rates are abysmally lower. This effectively makes ads completely ineffective in games, and this is lost money. Another thing to note about ads is that since 1920 they've changed from being technically oriented (listing the features of a product) to being emotion oriented. Instead of an ad just saying what it does, it tries to connect the product to some good emotion (sex, family, security, ...) to sell you that product.
So when you think about a game like Gone Home, isn't it the PERFECT type of game for ads? It's a game where interactivity is kept to a minimal, that tries to constantly put you in a higher emotional level and that has objects that you have to absolutely look at (that's the game pretty much) all the time. So a game like or variations on it would make the players more susceptible to ads, maybe.[/QUOTE]
On that note: Technically you could consider Gone Home a social justice advertisement, by having particular stance about its topic.
(I haven't played it so I don't know how effective it's at that. Or if it even has a message like that at all. Someone please fill me in.)
However, I think only certain kinds of messages (brand advertisement for example) suffer with interactivity while others (e.g. about interaction or self-awareness) can be conveyed more easily if they are adapted properly to the medium.
[editline]19th December 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46746522][...], all for a improbable conspiracy theory.
[...][/QUOTE]
Based on what was revealed so far, it's extremely probable she lied about fleeing her home a lot, smearing others in the process.
Anyway, the original post is something I would say is uncalled for and pretty shitty, [URL="https://archive.today/gCDSf"]but it has the address redacted[/URL].
It may look scary at first glance but it's hardly dangerous compared to the info already on Wu's YouTube.
And it's relevant because she herself brought the topic up, so if she lied (which everything points to) and it harmed others (which is readily observable), then it should be possible to reveal that lie while presenting necessary evidence.
The post about Cloudflare giving out the info is here (since the site is currently down. I assume the hoster didn't find it all that great either.): [url]https://archive.today/cgGbm[/url]
According to the comments it's standard practice for Cloudflare, and while I think they absolutely should forward reports, I don't think they should give out the information to whoever makes the complaint.
(Then again apparently it's not his private info either, so this is, while shitty, not critically bad.)
[QUOTE=Tamschi;46747783](I haven't played it so I don't know how effective it's at that. Or if it even has a message like that at all. Someone please fill me in.)[/QUOTE]
Probably an unpopular opinion but Gone Home isn't bad, other games do what I think it wanted to do better. [sp]Gone Home wanted to play with conventions of a horror game in a sense (Errant Signal and Super Bunnyhop noted this) but I think Among the Sleep does it far more effectively[/sp] The game really is just a straightforward, lightly interactive, young adult work of interactive media that probably got WAY too much attention for being a decently executed first person adventure game in the vein of myst and others. It doesn't really push an agenda to me, it's a love story in interactive form with some B stories hidden in the background.
[QUOTE=Tamschi;46747783][...]
However, I think only certain kinds of messages (brand advertisement for example) suffer with interactivity while others (e.g. about interaction or self-awareness) can be conveyed more easily if they are adapted properly to the medium.[/QUOTE]
Coming back to the above:
I think we're seeing a revival of classic or even ancient forms of arguments (dialogues, parables, ...) in games because those are precisely the kind of thing that still works even if receiver engagement (and with that scrutiny) is high.
In a society that isn't literate, while the spread of ideas and information is [B]much[/B] slower, those that are presented at face value are subject to dismissal due to confirmation bias (and lengthy justifications are usually not that interesting, so writing a persuasive argument requires some level of rhetoric unless someone specifically asks about it).
[I]Purely[/I] passive media (or, if you consider books, at least their widespread availability) are extremely new.
Even theatre has always some amount of audience participation, and oral storytelling much more so.
For that reason it made [I]and now again makes[/I] sense to present the justification in a way that elevates engagement to the second sweet-spot where most people will pay enough attention to stay for the justification also.
This can be done either through example (with a parable or case study, depending on the "objective or factual hardness or polarity" of the issue) or through dialogue (which, [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Socratic_dialogue&oldid=631632063#Socratic_dialogue_in_medieval_and_early_modern_philosophy"]written out[/URL], was a popular form to present rather dry topics, [URL="https://medium.com/@kmikeym/is-this-a-sandwich-50b1317eb3f5"]but also works in practice to make a more general point[/URL]) (instead of handwaving the moral as being given by a higher authority.
There's probably a good reason why (parts of) the old and the new testament are written so differently but I haven't exactly studied the societal context enough to be sure about it.
It's certain that at least parts of the new testament were written for a very educated audience though, which is why some of its symbolism is usually lost in translation. I can't find where I read this right now, but for example threefold repetition seems to have simply been a superlative in a language without. That's why I assume it was impossible to simply dictate the teachings).
Obviously this requires quite a bit more skill and effort than quickly shoving "AXE = women" past someone's full awareness, which I think is the reason the latter has become so prevalent in media that can target the "low awareness" channel due to their extremely low audience engagement.
Ironically enough I think (call-in) TV marketing, of all things, is an expression of the more complex form of argument.
Especially TV astrologers are often very, very skilled at communication and increasing audience participation through an otherwise passive medium.
[QUOTE=Chihuahua;46748270]Probably an unpopular opinion but Gone Home isn't bad, other games do what I think it wanted to do better. [sp]Gone Home wanted to play with conventions of a horror game in a sense (Errant Signal and Super Bunnyhop noted this) but I think Among the Sleep does it far more effectively[/sp] The game really is just a straightforward, lightly interactive, young adult work of interactive media that probably got WAY too much attention for being a decently executed first person adventure game in the vein of myst and others. It doesn't really push an agenda to me, it's a love story in interactive form with some B stories hidden in the background.[/QUOTE]
The issue is Gone Home was literally supposed to be another game entirely and had more than half of the content cut out to make the voting deadline, yet still received vapidly gushing praise and awards at every opportunity. The protagonist's sexual orientation shouldn't have ever been an issue. Same thing with Burch going [B]HAY GAIS I IS MADE A LESBIAN CHARACHUR CAUSE LESBIANS IS ALSO PEOPLE AN YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT OKAY[/B]
No shit lesbians are people, they've been people since people were people, and your grandstanding about it as actually neither helpful nor appreciative unless you're say, five years old, with all the faculties to match.
To reiterate as of earlier, a game about politics or by extension political game is fine. A game [I]in[/I] politics is not fine, and neither are whiteboard checkbox sexual/gender/political/philosophical orientations.
Your game is left to history; one can virtually guarantee if it's not earnest and with actual intent, it's not going to stand the test, or more importantly scrutiny of time. Take the above element out of Gone Home and it's actually less of a game than it was, and that's not doing any good for the maturation of the medium into [I]accurately and maturely[/I] expressing the travails of people walking a different path than the "accepted norm". (whatever the fuck that actually is, being completely relative)
Gone Home doesn't celebrate alternate sexuality, it pander-parades it. Big difference.
[QUOTE=Tamschi;46748272][small wall of text about audience engagement and presentation][/QUOTE]
I didn't think of this while writing it, which is why I didn't append this to the same post, but there's actually a conclusion we can take from that while looking at Gamergate:
[B]The general crazyness/memes/opposing SJWs whenever they do something stupid is actually a very good thing (within reason).[/B]
All of this increases engagement, even among people who initially are abhorred.
It's the same reason why smearing pro-GG on mainstream TV backfired so badly:
The smear was too emotionally charged so people became too invested and started doing research.
While at the "low awareness" level, you can propagate almost anything no matter how wrong.
If you raise awareness past that the propagation [URL="https://twitter.com/draginol/status/545411220401295360"]first slumps[/URL], and then rises again while shattering (or even reversing) narratives that can't be justified properly.
Obviously it's an equilibrium process with high variability, but I'm pretty sure that the current situation has pushed both the [I]journalistic ethics/integrity in games journalism[/I] and [I]sexism in gaming[/I] topics squarely out of the range where one can make convenient statements without being questioned.
A topic also only becomes memetic in the "high awareness" version, from what I've seen.
With the other channel it seems that it has to be constantly supported by the origin or it will stop spreading.
For the general public the gaming topics are probably not going to reach the critical point of high engagement where they "boil over", but I think [I]SJWs/being offended[/I] as a topic may be on its way towards it because people start getting fed up with unreasonable demands for being "considerate".
This makes me hopeful that at some point the risk for calling out that kind of behaviour becomes low enough for proper discussion about accommodation in the less literal sense too.
[editline]edit[/editline]
I probably should turn this into an essay and put it on my blog, but it would require properly sourcing all of this.
Maybe I'll feel up to it at some later point in time.
Those questions should be asked, and they should be answered honestly.
A huge vector of this entire issue is having people get to subjectively pick what a word means contextually, and then that definition is somehow supposed to be absolute, even without context.
On that road lies absurdity and idiocy.
[QUOTE=Ithon;46745991][url]http://theralphretort.com/cloudflare-gives-out-theralphretort-info-backs-brianna-wu-121814/[/url]
well cloudflare you seem to be putting yourself in a pickle, but I don't know where this will go besides comments on privacy.
wait what, I don't understand...
[thumb]https://i.imgur.com/L2aGu3h.jpg[/thumb][/QUOTE]
[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/sslHZOO.png[/IMG]
and she wrote 5 articles on this stuff
Why Gaming Culture Allows Abuse... and How We Can Stop It [url]https://archive.today/1ubly[/url]
Our Days of Rage: what #cancelcolbert reveals about women/of color and controversial speech [url]https://archive.today/Thm3D[/url]
Empire of Dirt: How GamerGate’s misogynistic policing of “gamer identity” degrades the whole gaming community [url]https://archive.today/0QXJK[/url]
Blood and Iron: The unacknowledged misogyny of the far right [url]https://archive.today/MGUr1[/url]
What ‘GamerGate’ Reveals About the Silencing of Women [url]https://archive.today/QHjd4[/url]
[editline]19th December 2014[/editline]
There is also the whole thing about Jennifer Jenson too
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/HJcvrMH.jpg[/IMG]
"Academic Adviser"
I don't think she had her "adviser" read that tripe
[QUOTE=27X;46748501]Those questions should be asked, and they should be answered honestly.
A huge vector of this entire issue is having people get to subjectively pick what a word means contextually, and then that definition is somehow supposed to be absolute, even without context.
On that road lies absurdity and idiocy.[/QUOTE]
I agree, but it's also important to keep in mind that sometimes there's a difference in meaning that really does have an underlying reason that makes it valid "in general".
I have a friend that I have really heated discussions with pretty often when we chat, and usually we have to do a lot of digging to find out what we actually disagree on.
The reason is that, while we really vehemently disagree on a few things, the difference is often a lot more subtle than the words you'd use in a normal conversation, and a lot more fundamental than what it applies to.
That we have a different understanding of the default context we make blanket statements in probably doesn't help either though :v:
We end up explicitly disagreeing on something pretty often, and pretty often that directly means we'll have unreconcilable definitions of abstract concepts like freedom that are more or less equally valid. (It's usually a matter of priorities that we [U]feel[/U] differently about.)
Sometimes it turns out one or both of our positions were incomplete, so we end up agreeing on the fundamental issue and can reconcile our views in the larger picture.
Sometimes there's just plain no conclusive research on what is the better way to approach a problem, which can be a bit unsatisfactory.
In any case these discussions are almost always extremely worthwhile.
They are also really tiring though. I probably couldn't do it well more than ~2.5 times in a week.
All I know about Katherine is that she regularly posts sexist guilt by association bullshit on twitter.
[QUOTE=Wii60;46748621][IMG]https://i.imgur.com/sslHZOO.png[/IMG]
[...][/QUOTE]
Enhance! ([URL="http://tweetsave.com/femfreq/status/527685454598926336"]verification[/URL])
[QUOTE=Wii60;46748621]There is also the whole thing about Jennifer Jenson too
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/HJcvrMH.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
That's pretty incriminating. Not for her herself but it could hurt both DiGRA's and especially CGSA's reputation.
(That's a ginormous image though.
I know it's that way for a reason but it wouldn't hurt if you thumbed it since the headings should still be legible afterwards.)
[QUOTE=Jordax;46740472]
[IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5H9L-SCUAAcPgE.png[/IMG]
[/QUOTE]
I remember seeing that this was fake on an 8chan thread. No archive page was saved of it (The post). Could anyone care to correct me or assert my suspicious as truth?
[QUOTE=uber.;46749144]All I know about Katherine is that she regularly posts sexist guilt by association bullshit on twitter.[/QUOTE]
That guilt by association tactic can heavily backfire if it wasn't for the fact that everyone was on Twitter.
You could post some links to a few articles where feminists do stupid things, for example.
It doesn't matter if we're associated with actual fedora tipping neckbeards with nice guy syndrome.
Guys is it unanimous that we all disagree with what the ralph retort did?
If so it seems it would be best if we make a statement as the FP community to condemn what he did while supporting the message of gamergate, the message could be signed in private with our FP aliases and tallied to show the number of people in support of said statement.
Now before anyone says we are too insignificant or it won't amount to much I've been in places, we did make a presence with TYFC donations and I've been personally in positions where the things I've said and suggested had snowballed before my eyes, the butterfly effect is very real.
If someone doesn't beat me too it while I rest, I'll start up a google doc unless some admin or mod disagrees. I wouldn't want to tread on Garry or his workforce even when being clear it's from the community not the studio.
[QUOTE=Ithon;46749540]Guys is it unanimous that we all disagree with what the ralph retort did?
If so it seems it would be best if we make a statement as the FP community to condemn what he did while supporting the message of gamergate, the message could be signed in private with our FP aliases and tallied to show the number of people in support of said statement.
Now before anyone says we are too insignificant or it won't amount to much I've been in places, we did make a presence with TYFC donations and I've been personally in positions where the things I've said and suggested had snowballed before my eyes, the butterfly effect is very real.
If someone doesn't beat me too it while I rest, I'll start up a google doc unless some admin or mod disagrees. I wouldn't want to tread on Garry or his workforce even when being clear it's from the community not the studio.[/QUOTE]
It's not unanimous.
If you want to setup something organized help start-up a union or organization - it doesn't need a website! It wouldn't make much sense to send a statement out as a random thread on FP. I'm sure lots of people would support a organization/union, since you seem to have the organizational skills to start one. (I might do it myself after I finish up with that Dota2FP league.)
If you did; it would garner some support from skeptics as well.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
