Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread. - General

[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;45906685]Do you think the people creating sockpuppets accounts to pose as minorities in the gamergate tag have done anything to help you either?[/QUOTE] dude seriously I usually ignore your political stances and stuff because you make cool model animations and all but come the fuck on. theres already tons of evidence that Sockpuppet accounts are almost-non existant in number and theres tons of minorities in support of this (including me).

the chatlog is just some dudes working on infographics, literally nothing even vaguely unethical and anyone can go there, it's not some kind of secret 4chan base of operations

One of my twitter followers just told me something interesting that I hadn't thought about: Zoe Quinn has been watching this happen for three weeks now. She's been watching the IRC since August 18th, and probably has been tracking 4chan /v/ very closely since then. She's seen a lot of people post, myself included, and I suspect she knows my own role in posting the Maya Felix Kramer call out and other things. She also saw who, why, and how certain people were targeting industry workers for harassmenmt. She saw what information they had, what they were doing, how they were going about things, and who they would target. In other words, she knew ahead of time that a group of people were encouraging harassment towards others. [i]So why the hell didn't she try to stop it or protect others?[/i] She could have talked to somebody or warned somebody. She could have talked to the IRC mods about it. She could have reached out to Eron to try to reach an agreement. She could have done the same thing that she did with TFYC - ask to message and talk about issues - and settle things. But instead she just watched as all these groups were planning to harass others, recorded it, and then posted it 3 weeks later without actively doing anything to stop it. I don't think it's her fault if misogynists sexually harass people. But I wonder why the hell she didn't try to stop any of this if she knew it was going on.

I'll laugh if the chat logs turn out to be from a /pol/ IRC.

[QUOTE=Dick Slamfist;45908494]It's rough. Zoe was smart. She cherry picked the best most damning quotes, it's going to deal a SIGNIFICANT blow to us, hoestly. People already weren't taking us seriously and dissmissing us but now it's even worse.[/QUOTE] The words of a few people in a IRC chat, which are also taken out of context, do not invalidate a movement of thousands of people from different genders, races and nationality standing up in defense of their hobby. Not that the rabid SJWs will ever admit that, they just want a free pass to insult people under the fake guise of protecting the minorities, the same minorities they are lambasting now because they are now standing up for their hobby.

[QUOTE=Reimu;45908682]One of my twitter followers just told me something interesting that I hadn't thought about: Zoe Quinn has been watching this happen for three weeks now. She's been watching the IRC since August 18th, and probably has been tracking 4chan /v/ very closely since then. She's seen a lot of people post, myself included, and I suspect she knows my own role in posting the Maya Felix Kramer call out and other things. She also saw who, why, and how certain people were targeting industry workers for harassmenmt. She saw what information they had, what they were doing, how they were going about things, and who they would target. In other words, she knew ahead of time that a group of people were encouraging harassment towards others. [i]So why the hell didn't she try to stop it or protect others?[/i] She could have talked to somebody or warned somebody. She could have talked to the IRC mods about it. She could have reached out to Eron to try to reach an agreement. She could have done the same thing that she did with TFYC - ask to message and talk about issues - and settle things. But instead she just watched as all these groups were planning to harass others, recorded it, and then posted it 3 weeks later without actively doing anything to stop it. I don't think it's her fault if misogynists sexually harass people. But I wonder why the hell she didn't try to stop any of this if she knew it was going on.[/QUOTE] She was playing the long game. The longer she let it sit, the more her little portfolio grew, the more impact the punch would have when she finally got it together.

None of the people are OPs or Half OPs either.

Max, can you tell us how mad you are that you can't just perma ban this issue away? Ban away dissenting voices? How mad are you about that? Because were all happy as fuck you can't do that. You would too.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;45908733]She was playing the long game. The longer she let it sit, the more her little portfolio grew, the more impact the punch would have when she finally got it together.[/QUOTE] And yet, by actively choosing to do, she also sat on her hands and failed to protect several people that faced severe harassment/scrutiny. I guess when you dig in for the long haul you don't pop out of the rabbit hole until it's most beneficial for yourself.

[QUOTE=Wii60;45908656] I usually ignore your political stances and stuff because you make cool model animations and all but come the fuck on. theres already tons of evidence that Sockpuppet accounts are almost-non existant in number and theres tons of minorities in support of this (including me).[/QUOTE] I like how its the social justice warriors who forced people to pull out their minority cards. Gamers usually never care about that stuff.

zoe doesn't matter anymore, ignore her edit: her reputation is nonexistant and the only people who'll listen to her are those who need to satisfy their own confirmation bias

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;45908733]She was playing the long game. The longer she let it sit, the more her little portfolio grew, the more impact the punch would have when she finally got it together.[/QUOTE] She committed the cardinal sin of turtling, she didn't pay attention to the mothball that's been building. She can go ahead and post these small little bits of information, [I]however[/I], its too late. The damage is done, there's no turning back and there's no saving these people. She tried to turtle, but the other side has just been building more and more evidence over these three weeks that no matter what she puts up there it really won't do anything more than just get more evidence of her and the others failures.

I mean generally speaking if you need to make a hashtag saying "It's over, you lost," then it's really only just begun.

I'm a little concerned about the fact so many people might just to eat this up, ignoring the fact that 4chan doesn't just collectively agree on everything that is said somewhere on the board. I honestly think it's just a pair of idiots from /pol/ that happened to be on the IRC that's currently in the OP of the quinnspiracy thread on /v/, and it wouldn't surprise me of almost no one is using because why the fuck would that many people bother with IRC. This guy had a pretty good summary of what I think is happening: [IMG]http://puu.sh/bocQE/d7cff0a18b.png[/IMG]

/v/ should start posting photos on twitter from /v/ with anon's saying they had no affiliation to the IRC and don't support any of the harassment or crap that went on within it. quite literally flood the gamergate tag. people won't be able to ignore it if there's constant anti-harassment posts from /v/ users being shared.

It's funny, the term "fag", when you look for it in the chat logs, is like mostly one guy's name, for a couple pages. The actual term only shows up about 300 times, the rest of the 90% are names.

First off, sorry for the late reply! Also, did you get my PM? Anyway, [QUOTE=Denicide;45908133]A few minor points before I address the video, which I think is the meat of the whole GG 'thing.' The point about gamers across the aisles being concerned about nepotism is absolutely true, but I (and most of the SJ people I know) are put on the defensive by the grossness we see in the other side. There has been so many lines drawn in the sand, so much anger that 'breaking ranks' is inconceivable right now. I mean, I've defended Kotaku in the last few weeks which is just an shitty site. The whole debacle would probably have gotten much wider traction if it hadn't spawned from the Zoe Quinn thing.[/quote] I don't think this is entirely true, though. A lot of people in SJ have broken rank with their fellow activists and created their own splinter support groups during this. Many people have called out ZQ as abusive since Day 1, with others referencing their own personal histories with Zoe. I think feminist communities feel drawn to support ZQ - especially due to the ongoing issues with sexual harassment - but I think, again, the nuance is getting lost in the binary. Most people feel they have to pick a side. You are under no obligation to pick one, if you honestly feel you are acting in good faith and upholding your role as a feminist in the process. [quote]It's hard to disagree that there's been harassment from both sides which has damaged the discussion as a whole. Ironic, too, that a debate which began with a game about depression has led to an unprecedented number of calls for people to kill themselves. So in other words I agree with you about the problems with the discussion, but not so much about the problems with VG journalism. You champion the idea of objectivity in the video which I feel is really, deeply misguided. To your credit, you acknowledge that perfect objectivity is unachievable but I would go one step further and say it's undesirable. There's a divide among gamers, I think, in how games are viewed. I see a large contingent that want games to be viewed/reviewed as products and an equally large contingent asking for games to be viewed/reviewed as works of art. The difference, I think, is the desirability of objectivity. When you're reviewing cheese graters or vacuum cleaners I wouldn't expect the writer in question to talk about the politics of the product unless it was made by some particularly terrible corporation. It's absurd to say that this or that phone or toaster promotes this or that way of thinking. Without knowing much about the scene for reviewing toasters, it seems reasonable to me that the person doing the reviewing would strive to be objective. People want to know how the toaster toasts bread. That's not what I want to know about with videogames, though. I want the author to be predisposed for or against a genre or series; I want them to give me anecdotes about the game in question, I want them to give me their interpretation of the 'message' (if that isn't too much to ask). There is very little you can objectively say about a game, and even less which is valuable. It's a bit heavy handed, but I like the site [URL="http://www.objectivegamereviews.com/gorogoa-review/"]Objective Game Reviews[/URL] for demonstrating the absurdity of talking in objective terms about videogames. [/quote] I'm glad we can agree on the issue with harassment, that's good. And the irony of suicidal harassment across both sides is really sad. However, when it comes to gaming journalism, I think it's important to remember that there's a difference between being objective and being bland. When I mean "be objective," I mean, "provide an honest look at a video game that is highly critical but also highly constructive." Many gaming journalists refuse to be critical of games in meaningful ways; doubly so when someone they personally know is on the other end of the review. It often feels like journalists aren't giving enough time to develop their articles, and really let the pros and cons of the work they're reviewing truly sink in. I also think most journalists don't take video gaming very seriously. I rarely see writers try to connect video game narratives to other forms of art. Or, if they do, it comes off as awkward and heavy-handed. For instance, you could write an excellent overview of "Papers, Please" in relation to Soviet literature about the Eastern bloc bureaucracy. But don't try to connect "Papers, Please" to Doctor Who and write a clickbait titled called "History is Cool Now for Narratives," etc. It just feels like the latter is very common now when it comes to gaming journalism, as if writers don't take the work they're reviewing very seriously, and don't go the extra mile to be constructively critical of video games. [quote]More than that, I think games deserve more than to be judged 'good' or 'bad', 'fun' or 'unfun'. Games are worth more than a score or a cursory assessment of how they play. No one thinks of a movie critic's favorite movie as necessarily the best movie: it's understood that the way they watched it, how they approached it, their mindset etc. all affected how they felt about the movie. Movies can be artfully shot and have no impact on a writer and likewise by clumsily shot and worth thousands of words. This is a problem journalism created for itself by adhering so rigidly to a scoring system and to pretensions of objectivity and being unbiased. Now, though, when some outlets try to move away from this they're shouted down, their writers are attacked and there's no productive discussion to be had. I mean, no one is saying IGN or GameSpot or whatever have to go away, but it's cool that some sites want to provide more than consumer criticism and scores.[/quote] Well, I disagree. You can have a scoring system while simultaneously exploring specific things you found interesting. Ebert used the five-star system throughout his career, yet he didn't let it hold him back in regards to his own perspective on journalism. In fact, he often went into detail about what he did and did not like, and he did so from the objective standpoint of a film critic who understood writing, acting, and filmography. That's what I mean by objective: bringing a constructive and nuanced look at a production based on your own personal skills, yet trying to remain fair and accurate. It's more than possible to be entertaining yet objective. I don't think bias and entertainment are mutually exclusive, and I think a review can still be objective without veering towards serious bias (i.e. no constructive criticism). [quote]So much of GamerGate seems to be pushback against finally, after close to forty years, challenging the idea of a game reviewer as objective and unbiased. Reviewers/journalists/critics have genders identities, races, class positions that [I]should [/I]make them biased. Even the Facepunch review discussion strikes very obviously at being 'objective', a word so devalued (even if it wasn't unachievable) that it's lost all meaning. Journalists shouldn't take bribes, but they also shouldn't pretend that doing that makes them unbiased. So yes, in other words, game journalism does need to evolve into game criticism. For my money, though, Gamergate is holding that back, not propelling it forward.[/QUOTE] I think it's important for different intersections of identity to be found within gaming journalism, for sure. But social awareness, intersection of identity, and successful representation should be considered one ingredient (a core one, no doubt) out of many that compose the final review. I firmly believe you can write an objective review about the intersections of identity within a given video game, and simultaneously be constructive. It's totally possible, having done it myself.

[QUOTE=Tamschi;45907825]IIrc that middle one is actually a composite too :v: I think the photographer won some kind of prize but it was later rescinded(?) because they found out.[/QUOTE] Now that's irony.

Someone should find Zoe's SA account and find out if she is a FYAD shitposter, I would do that but I don't have an account.

[url]http://pastebin.com/X4QihN9i[/url] the chat zoe got her screencaps from literally had 6 people in it

Doesn't TheMittani have connections to weird twitter or FYAD? I know Zoe Quinn and TheMittani have gotten close recently (which is ironic, seeing how TheMittani is the guy who urged people to harass a depressed and suicidal EVE player). [editline]6th September 2014[/editline] Also, I love how fickle all these people on twitter are. So many people fall back and forth between supporting ZQ and being concerned that she is misleading them. It's like watching a pendulum swing back and forth. Eventually the rope is going to get cut somewhere, and everyone is going to fall on one side or another.

[QUOTE=Ziron;45905948]Zoe "Cuckold" Quinn has posted a "bombshell" that reveals that #gamergate is actually run by a shadowy cabal of people on IRC that certainly isn't a cherry-picked IRC chatroom! [URL]https://storify.com/strictmachine/gameovergate[/URL] It says a lot about a person if they think that a giant movement involving nerds was secretly controlled by an Illuminati-like association of people in an obscure IRC chatroom, but not in the way they expect. Rami "Spends over a year making a mediocre 8-bit retro game in a game company" Ismael is now saying that those poor Gamergate people were just manipulated and that they should give it up. Surprise, he's buds with Zoe. Also, if you believe anything Zoe says you're dumb TBH.[/QUOTE] It sure is convenient that she came out with this bombshell right after it turns out she threw Maya to the wolves. Almost as if attention is being diverted to something else for the sake of damage control.

This discussion would be a whole lot more fun if Pvt. Martin entered the fray.

[QUOTE=Teddybeer;45909386]You have a freenode and rizon #burgersandfries. The first barely makes 10 people while the second has never been below 200. They have some logs from both.[/QUOTE] The #quinnspiracy IRC was never mentioned in a OP on /v/. Her original "raid" images come from this IRC. Also if it's 6 people how is it a raid.

Someone should make an enormous compilation highlighting the areas that Zoe purposefully missed out on including (i.e. "Again. Focus on the journalists.") [editline]6th September 2014[/editline] Also apparently a new tag was developed, #gameethics, with a lot of people from the anti-GG side joining in to fight against the issues with ethics. Thoughts?

[QUOTE=Reimu;45909786]Someone should make an enormous compilation highlighting the areas that Zoe purposefully missed out on including (i.e. "Again. Focus on the journalists.") [editline]6th September 2014[/editline] Also apparently a new tag was developed, #gameethics, with a lot of people from the anti-GG side joining in to fight against the issues with ethics. Thoughts?[/QUOTE] i think they are trying to fragment the movement with all these new hashtags [editline]6th September 2014[/editline] Internet aristrocrat is in here right now (REMINDER, HE HAS A LIVE SHOW AT 8PM EDT) [video=youtube;HWzA9fcBUjY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWzA9fcBUjY[/video]

SJW's never apologize and never accept apologies.

[QUOTE=Teddybeer;45909956]How should it look and how do we get a large audience for it?[/QUOTE] Probably via an imgur album, and then post it on twitter in the tags showing the comparisons.

[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;45906788][t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3797350/hosting/2014-09/2014-09-06_16-45-00.png[/t] [t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3797350/hosting/2014-09/2014-09-06_16-45-21.png[/t][/QUOTE] I didn't know you had to use your own picture as your twitter avatar. Speaking of avatars, the #reclaimanimeavatars hashtag fizzled out pretty fast :v:

[QUOTE=Wii60;45909857]i think they are trying to fragment the movement with all these new hashtags [editline]6th September 2014[/editline] Internet aristrocrat is in here right now (REMINDER, HE HAS A LIVE SHOW AT 8PM EDT) [video=youtube;HWzA9fcBUjY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWzA9fcBUjY[/video][/QUOTE] Who are these guys besides IA?