Boogie2988, Gamergate supporter, receives death threats - Polidicks

[QUOTE=xxncxx;46242182][URL="https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/no-true-scotsman"]No True Scotsman.[/URL][/QUOTE] i just want to say that no true scotsman is rediculous and can literally be used to link any two groups under one title if you try hard enough. Like I could literally compare ISIS and the muslim guy who runs the Mobile across the street from my work and say that they're both the same because there's no quantitative empirical boundaries that separate them. It's like, if something starts from point A, and you move it a little to B, and then to C, eventually there becomes a point where you have to agree that it's not A anymore and it's ridiculous to conflate it with A. The only reason people bring NTS up is because it's an easy catchall to link an extremist, unpopular, degrading, or otherwise defaming position to an existing identity. But if something diverges enough then we can clearly determine that it's not the same.

[QUOTE=fulgrim;46244022]This is the reason i find it hard to support GG, i agree with the movement's stated goal 100%, but a quick glance at any Gamergate facebook/steam/whatever group and alongside the few level headed posters you will find hundreds of "i hope those dumb feminist cunts get raped" comments from sexist neck-beards who only hopped on board the movement because they don't like women, and i don't feel overly comfortable throwing my lot in with people like that.[/QUOTE] well then go on twitter and check out the hundreds of gamergate followers who denounce harassment and report accounts that try and harass others while using #gamergate.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;46247401]I think it was started by sexists who marketed it really well and it attracted a huge number of non-sexists but at the same time all of the sexists on the internet discovered they had a shiny new thing they could hide behind and legitimize their hate.[/QUOTE]It really wasn't. It would have been virtually impossible for something like that to get off the ground. It wouldn't have gotten anywhere if it didn't have legitimacy, and the internet really doesn't like being tugged around by others against its will. Hell, we're at that point because that is in part what people tried to do. It wasn't even started by any one person or small group. A lot of people were all acting independently and it ended up coalescing in to a greater body as they were all working to a single goal. The closest anyone could even try to argue is when Adam Baldwin coined the name, and people just ran with it because it was functional. You're looking to see some hateful movement, you want to, and through that you're finding it. You're looking for monsters under the bed, and seeing them in the dark nothingness. Its the embodiment of the confirmation bias. You see what you want to see. You know, probably one of the best examples recently is Brianna Wu herself. The moment her dox got posted to 8chan, people jumped all over whoever did it, reported the post, and told them to cut that shit out and fuck off. The people who make the death threats and rape threats get reported for it, and the doxxes get deleted as soon as a mod spots them. I mean fuck, the closest they've gotten to endorsing doxxing of anyone anti-gg is when they went after the guy who made the threats against Anita. Yeah, a Brazilian journalist or something who had wrote about her previously, they went after him for it. Just no one on the outside wants to actually look in to it themselves. They'll just let it be supplied to them, and the only ones who care enough to supply that shit is the anti-gg crowd, but they cut out the parts where people are chastising the ones doing the doxxes and making the threats.

[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;46241988]What is wrong with some people?[/QUOTE] I was around when he tweeted that. He said that if he reported every threat, he'd be talking to the police every week. It's also inaccurate to call him a GamerGate supporter. He was around early on, but he eventually detached himself from the movement, and while he's sympathetic to the cause's goals, he explicitly says he's not a GamerGater.

[video=youtube;bXQI_zAF3HA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXQI_zAF3HA[/video]

[QUOTE=Zeke129;46247401]I think it was started by sexists who marketed it really well and it attracted a huge number of non-sexists but at the same time all of the sexists on the internet discovered they had a shiny new thing they could hide behind and legitimize their hate. You can't go through tweets and posts about gamergate without countless people talking about what a "vapid cunt" so-and-so is or what a "whore/cunt/bitch/etc" all feminists are and how feminists are ruining gaming. It's just heaps and heaps of worthless drivel like this. And with places like Breitbart hopping on board it's only gotten more extreme and hateful. The beauty of combating poor journalism is that you can literally just vote with your wallet. You don't have to bump shoulders with MRAs/red pillers to "save gaming", you can just do it.[/QUOTE] I think a sex scandal got misogynists to give it a nice little shove, then the movement as a whole ditched them as well as they could. Harassment is very quickly reported and denounced at every turn, and the person who sent Brianna Wu threats was immediately reported the second #gamergate got wind. (of course, Twitter only reads reports of threats if you're the actual victim, which is absolute bullshit, in my opinion) The media smears it as misogynistic as much as humanly possible because they have a vested interest in keeping the corruption as-is. And when you mention Breitbart, it's mostly been Milo talking about it, and from what I've seen of him, he's been civil, professional, and well spoken about the situation. I'm willing to bet if there was a similar movement against FoxNews and the rest of the mainstream media you'd be talking differently. This corruption goes to the top, hence why whenever a media outlet puts out an article about GamerGate, it's focused on smearing it as a hate group, and not a consumer revolt. Raising questions about gaming media raises questions about mainstream media.

I think it's important to remember that the five guys incident is entirely unrelated to gg - they just happened very close to one another so it's easy to strike them as the same phenomenon. gg is the result of digging deeper into gaming journalism, and it started with "Someone made a review with a conflict of interest in mind, I might have seen this happen somewhere else". Cue snowball effect and you have what is in twitter today. On the other hand, the five guys incident is directly related to Zoe. As it currently stands, she is not relevant about her unless its in context with TFYC- both parties shared their private conversation on twitter, the one between TFYC's legal body and Zoe, where they put together the statement on her to be put on TFYC's tumblr. So yes, at it's very core, factually, GG is entirely about making a change of attitude in video game journalism. Making it seem like GG and Zoe are related to each other is a logical fallacy in itself. [editline]16th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=codemaster85;46247472]You know thats the same shit xenophobic dickheads use as an excuse with Islam and their extremist's.[/QUOTE] Don't compare people to extremist groups. I think this was already established many times. Nobody is worse or equal to them, no matter how wrong they are.

[QUOTE=Katatonic717;46242184]Why the fuck would you want to threaten Boogie? He's like the coolest nicest dude.[/QUOTE] [b]A lot[/b] of people on the internet are seriously ill. [sp]Goes for several people in this thread aswell[/sp]

So basically those who support gamergate think the game industry is sexist and misogynistic of other way around?

[QUOTE=Pnukup;46249564]So basically those who support gamergate think the game industry is sexist and misogynistic of other way around?[/QUOTE] They aren't but it's what the other side wants you to think, it's all about demonizing your enemy.

[QUOTE=Pnukup;46249564]So basically those who support gamergate think the game industry is sexist and misogynistic of other way around?[/QUOTE] Neither. People who support gamergate want change in the games journalism industry, that's all. The issue is people in the movement who dishonestly use the hashtag to attack women.

Oh then I am 100 % for gamergate!

[QUOTE=Pnukup;46249564]So basically those who support gamergate think the game industry is sexist and misogynistic of other way around?[/QUOTE] As stated above, no, but anti-gamergate media sure does seem to come across that way at times... when #notYourShield first came about, that was one hell of a mess.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;46244201]Then don't support feminism either. They also have a loud idiotic sexist minority. It's 2 sides of the same coin. Both movements, at their core, are striving for something good, and both sides have loud ignorant minorities that make the rest of the group look bad. That's why I support the core aspect of gamergate (journalistic integrity in the gaming industry) AND I support feminism's core aspect of equality.[/QUOTE] I get where you are coming from, but the issue i have is that if you removed the sexist people from the feminist movement you would still have a millions strong idea with a good sense of where it was headed despite some internal disagreements. whereas i reckon #gamergate would suffer a massive loss of interest the second it tried to tackle any journalist or website that the majority of its followers did not perceive as an evil feminist "SJW" (after all we have known sites like IGN have been taking bribes to give mediocre games 11/10 ratings for years, do we not care about that? or are we just waiting for IGN to cheat on its boyfriend so we can call it a slut?).

I sympathize with GamerGate's stated goal, but I really don't think it's gonna change much - and there's no denying that there is a very vocal minority who are being not very nice. The one thing I find annoying about the whole thing is that sites like ArsTechnica and The Verge have suddenly begun publishing articles about GamerGate daily, and they all suck dick. I just want to read about tech news, thank you very much - I don't care for this not-very-reputable journalist's 100th take on a movement that is so poorly defined. They know they're gonna get massive hits (and a nice vivid comment section to boot), though, so they still do them. It's annoying as shit, and it seems pretty dishonest - I don't think they really that much, but they know they're gonna get sum of dat sweet ad money.

[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;46242835]To be fair, that's kind of like excusing Dow Chemical Company for the Bhopal Disaster because they donated money to fight cancer.[/QUOTE] "I am an American that lives a cushy life in a first world country and I have so much self importance and so little perspective that I equate one of the worst chemical disasters in history that killed over ten thousand people to a few posts on twitter that didn't agree with me or my thoughts, and that made me upset" Replace American with European when needed and you got a good percentage of the rabid anti-GGers.

[QUOTE=fulgrim;46249670]I get where you are coming from, but the issue i have is that if you removed the sexist people from the feminist movement you would still have a millions strong idea with a good sense of where it was headed despite some internal disagreements. whereas i reckon #gamergate would suffer a massive loss of interest the second it tried to tackle any journalist or website that the majority of its followers did not perceive as an evil feminist "SJW" (after all we have known sites like IGN have been taking bribes to give mediocre games 11/10 ratings for years, do we not care about that? or are we just waiting for IGN to cheat on its boyfriend so we can call it a slut?).[/QUOTE] The reason people in the movement hate "SJWs" as you put it is because, by definition, they are the type of people who use social justice to shield them from criticism and as an excuse to be patronizing and on a moral high ground. Not the genuine supporters of feminism. In the case of GG, that's something that's been used by the people who have been accused of corruption to try to change the narrative. GGers in general have no beef against feminists, quite the contrary in some cases, but with the people who pretend to push such agenda to profit personally and to hide the fact they have been abusive towards others. IMO that is a lot more vile than throwing wads of cash towards reviewers.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;46242499]The sad thing is that we're finally past the point where the media blames school shootings and violence in general on video games and now some gamers are very publicly threatening to shoot up schools / kill someone because of video games[/QUOTE] They might be gamers. There's no proof it is, and no proof it isn't a false flag. There's already been several fuckup false flags attempted that got found out and the series of events around Brianna Wu in particular is very suspect. But, again, no more than circumstantial proof either way. [QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;46242906]All you have to do is look at the roots of the movement. It all started over a single woman, expanded to multiple women, and only started involving a few men when they were connected to those women. I get that there are people in the movement trying to give it a more positive direction, but I think it's too late for that now.[/QUOTE] It doesn't matter if they were women or men, they are using their gender as a shield and it's not working except on people who don't do research. Oh wait. Dorito pope was male, that means we must have all been misandrists when criticizing him.

This whole anti-GG thing fucking confuses me. So, a female dev boinks some journo dudes, who cares. She gets more exposure for boinking said journo dudes, cares a bit. Journo dudes cover it up and said that the people pointing fingers are all misogynistic weenies. How could you possibly EVER be against the GG movement, especially from a professional journalistic viewpoint. It's like you're objectively wrong, but thinking you're in the right because you made up other factors that don't exist. Sure the death threats exist (on both sides cough cough) and sure some people are actually hateful (there's always hateful people in any group) you are actually delusional, and it's funny because you're actually the one with hate. Whether it be from a victimization complex or anger from sheer boredom, you're the type of person who wants revenge, revenge on people who have done nothing wrong but want to see fairness in journalism. Using terrible acts and other's suffering to justify the shunning of a whole culture filled with progressive, smart, and nice people shame on you.

[QUOTE=Glitchman;46250709]This whole anti-GG thing fucking confuses me. So, a female dev boinks some journo dudes, who cares. She gets more exposure for boinking said journo dudes, cares a bit. Journo dudes cover it up and said that the people pointing fingers are all misogynistic weenies. How could you possibly EVER be against the GG movement, especially from a professional journalistic viewpoint. It's like you're objectively wrong, but thinking you're in the right because you made up other factors that don't exist. Sure the death threats exist (on both sides cough cough) and sure some people are actually hateful (there's always hateful people in any group) you are actually delusional, and it's funny because you're actually the one with hate. Whether it be from a victimization complex or anger from sheer boredom, you're the type of person who wants revenge, revenge on people who have done nothing wrong but want to see fairness in journalism. Using terrible acts and other's suffering to justify the shunning of a whole culture filled with progressive, smart, and nice people shame on you.[/QUOTE] The majority of the viewpoint of Anti-GG comes from people following "trusted" names who are actually lying, manipulative sacks of shit, and said names are using these followers as a tool and a weapon. Through misinformation, people like the various Literally Whos and their journalist friends have attempted to smear GG as a misogynistic movement and thereby bring feminists and other social justice advocates over to their side. Why are they doing this? Simple, because their arguments cannot hold up without the social justice slant they've put on things, and allowing this to happen unhindered would expose some insanely nasty corruption among them to the open air, killing both a lot of journalists' careers and a few devs' careers as well. Plus, there's a massive chain of people who are friends and friends of friends, meaning that nepotism is rampant, and each person automatically either has everyone else's back or gets destroyed by the collective when they dissent. The "leaders" of Anti-GG don't feel any shame. They know exactly what they're doing, using their trump cards of feminism and mob mentality to shout down any discussion of their wrongdoings before it even starts. They're covering their own asses and systematically attacking gamers to do it, using their own trusting followers as tools for their selfish purposes. The people following these leaders either are crazy enough to follow them even if corruption was shown to their faces, or just ignorant of their corruption while biased against gamers. The followers might feel shame if shown the truth in a way they cannot possibly deny, but they might just ignore it as usual because the leaders said so anyways.

Gamergate is a load of shit, who gives a fuck

[QUOTE=Complifused;46251006]Gamergate is a load of shit, who gives a fuck[/QUOTE] Usually people who say this are the uninformed

[QUOTE=Mecha Pirate;46249354]I think it's important to remember that the five guys incident is entirely unrelated to gg - they just happened very close to one another so it's easy to strike them as the same phenomenon. gg is the result of digging deeper into gaming journalism, and it started with "Someone made a review with a conflict of interest in mind, I might have seen this happen somewhere else". Cue snowball effect and you have what is in twitter today. On the other hand, the five guys incident is directly related to Zoe. As it currently stands, she is not relevant about her unless its in context with TFYC- both parties shared their private conversation on twitter, the one between TFYC's legal body and Zoe, where they put together the statement on her to be put on TFYC's tumblr. So yes, at it's very core, factually, GG is entirely about making a change of attitude in video game journalism. Making it seem like GG and Zoe are related to each other is a logical fallacy in itself. [editline]16th October 2014[/editline] Don't compare people to extremist groups. I think this was already established many times. Nobody is worse or equal to them, no matter how wrong they are.[/QUOTE] Im comparing it not so much on how bad, just saying almost every group has stupid extremists and its stupid to generalize the loud few over such a massive movement.

[QUOTE=Complifused;46251006]Gamergate is a load of shit, who gives a fuck[/QUOTE] Yeah who gives a fuck about wanting gaming journalism to be about games and not retarded sex scandal coverup bullshit.

[QUOTE=Mio Akiyama;46251036]Usually people who say this are the uninformed[/QUOTE] It's actually fine not giving a fuck, but coming into a thread filled with people who do just to announce that you shouldn't causes some shitstorms

Isn't this war ever gonna end... My perspective of gaming world is pretty much this: 1. A new game is released. Reviewers rush to play through half the game so they could write a review about it. 2. Customers who buy it and don't like it will also tell other people it's not that great of a game (We usually go and say it's ok/great but nothing special) 3. Now you start seeing forum threads, reddit(First impressions), youtube videos about this particular game and people posting their opinions. 4. People who read the thread/watch the video/browse reddit topic will get more informed about the game and probably have a different view what the game actually is. 5.These people tend to go and tell then others that they should probably wait for a sale or not buy at all this particular game cause there is bad humm about it going around. Now if a game is good pretty much the opposite will happen. People tell others the game is great and they recommend the game for others and it will pretty much sell automatically if it's a good game wider audience (minecraft, gmod). Seeing big game reviewers like IGN, Gamespot for me is like watching the cgi trailer on youtube or commercial on tv. It's something we should avoid at all costs. Pretty much 99% of the time peoples opinion is much more accurate than David Hasselhoffs Freedom review on games when it comes to information about the game. The reason why IGN and other big gaming review companies still go around is cause people read their reviews and buy the products. Just like how some people buy the new Audi when you see the commercial on tv. So what few hilly billies say on internet about feminism and other ethics in gaming shouldn't concern any of us cause these people aren't important for you or worth your time. The anti-gg have already proven that they are not capable of having reasonable conversations with the people involved in this mess so just ignore them and move on cause they seem to love attention.

why does the title imply boogie is pro-gamergate? he isn't. [URL="https://twitter.com/Boogie2988/status/522542105680707584"]he's neutral[/URL]

The biggest thing that came out of the whole gamergate thing is that people were really delusional about the video gaming industry, like it was some sort of sacred ground of financial and ethical purity. It's like any other industry in the world. People are corrupt, nepotism is a thing, so is sectarianism, and people have relations that break ethics all the time. It was all visible right from the start, but because people expected it to have no troubles, they never looked into it. Until Zoe Quinn accidentally brought everyone's eyes to it.

[QUOTE=Bobie;46251457]why does the title imply boogie is pro-gamergate? he isn't. [URL="https://twitter.com/Boogie2988/status/522542105680707584"]he's neutral[/URL][/QUOTE] He's getting hate for one of his videos he posted 2-4 weeks back. Where he plays on the notion that there are people out there who honestly believe that ALL gamers are legitimately: basement dwelling, white, cis, virgins who get their kicks by being bigoted. Ala precisely what anti-GG people seem to believe. He then tells anyone who believes these aforementioned things that they are hypocrites; and that he is a living, breathing example of why they are incorrect. It's not hard to see why he's getting flamed.

[QUOTE=Mattk50;46250503] It doesn't matter if they were women or men, they are using their gender as a shield and it's not working except on people who don't do research. Oh wait. Dorito pope was male, that means we must have all been misandrists when criticizing him.[/QUOTE] Last time I checked no one was calling Dorito pope a whore and a slut because he slept with someone. And the list time I checked Doritogate didn't result in death threats, doxxing, and bomb threats, mostly against women.